' LIBRARY OF THE University of California. Class "Mi / ^ eniD in Miie Hijti German A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES OF THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY, BY FRED COLE HICKS. BALTIMORE: JOHN MURPHY COMPANY, 1902. CONTENTS. PAOK. Prefatory 5 Sources and Texts 7 Introduction 12 ViL 15 Harte 28 Gar 49 WoL 57 Eehte 63 Genuoc 69 Sere 74 Starke 76 Ad 77 Michel 78 Grimme 78 Strengthening Particles with Comparatives 79 Summary by Dialects 81 Strengthening Particles in the Different Classes of Litera- ture 82 Biographical Sketch 87 127174 STRENGTHENING MODIFIERS OF ADJECTIVES AND ADVERBS IN MIDDLE HIGH GERMAN. PREFATORY. In the following pages a study of the use of strengthening modifiers of adjectives and adverbs during the classical Middle High German period, or from about 1150 to 1300, is attempted. Such devices being so largely unconscious, and at the same time so subject to fashion, we may expect to find a certain consistency in their use, and to see in them marks of style, sometimes of the individual, but more often of different schools and classes of literature. They seem therefore well worthy of special treatment. Aside from the thesis of H. Z. Kip,^ which is limited to the religious poetry of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, and which treats the subject more from the standpoint of the lexicographer, no such treatment has been given. What little has been done on the subject is to be found in the dictionaries, and scattered through the notes in the various editions of the works of this period. That the material there offered is inadequate, and the statement of facts often erroneous, is apparent to one who takes but a casual glance into the subject, or who will but compare the notes of the different editors. During the investigation which has formed the basis of this study, such questions as the following have been kept in mind, in the case of each of the words which may be classed as strengthening particles, viz : 1 . The origin and development of meaning of the word. 2. In what dialects and for what periods is it current? 3. In what classes of literature is it found, or in what classes is it the most frequent? 4. With what classes of adjectives and adverbs is it used? 5. Is it a ^Zur Geschichte der Steigerungsadverbien in der deutschen geistlichen Dichtung des 11. und 12. Jahrhunderts, (Leipzig Dissertation) Journ. of Germ. Phil., vol. in, p. 143 ff. 1 6 6 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German. part of the popular dialect, or is it confined to literary or poetical diction? 6. Are there any signs of its becoming obsolete? 7. The peculiarities of individual writers, if any. Not all of the literature of this period has been examined, as that seemed neither necessary nor feasible. The works which were selected for exhaustive treatment, however, are such as may be considered fairly representative of the different classes of literature during the period, and are numerous enough to warrant the drawing of general conclusions. For the purpose of statistics, the different forms of the same word to which a strengthening particle is joined (as for instance, wd, ndah, ndhe, ndhen) are grouped together, and no distinction is made between the adjective and the adverbial use of the same word. This plan has been adopted on the assumption that the choice of a strengthening particle with any author is not dependent on the form or grammatical use of the word to be strengthened. In the examples which are given, the more usual form of the word, and in the case of adjectives, the uninflected form, appears. No attempt has been made to preserve the orthography of the different editions, except where direct cita- tions are made. Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High Germcm, SOURCES AND TEXTS. The following works have served as sources. They are arranged under the different dialects, as far as may be deter- mined, in chronological order, the classification and dating being that of the various editors, PauPs Grundriss, and Michels' Mittelhochdeutsches Elementarbuch. The works have been examined exhaustively, except as may be indicated for some of the longer ones.^ Alemannic. 1. Poetical monuments. a) Lower Alemannic. Reinmar von Hagenau, Des Minneeangsfriihling, p. 150 ff. Gottfried von Strassburg, Tristan, ed. by Bechstein, Leipzig 1890. Konrad Fleck, Flore und Blanscheflur, ed. by Emil Sommer, Quedlinburg 1846. Die Gute Frau, ed. by the same, ZfdA 2, 385 ff. Volmar, Das Steinbuch, ed. by Lambel, Heilbronn 1877. Konrad von Wiirzburg, Der Trojanische Krieg (10,000), ed. by A. von Keller, Stuttgart, 1858. Keiser Otte mit dem Barte, ed. by K. A. Hahn, Qued- linb.-Leipzig 1838. Alexius, ed. by Richard Henczynski, Berlin 1898. Hugo von Langenstein, Martina (10,000), ed. by A. von Keller, Stuttgart 1856. Reinfried von Braunschweig (10,000), ed. by Bartsch, Stuttgart 1871. Peter von Stauffenberg, ed. by Edw. Schroder, Zwei Alt- deutsche Rittermaeren, Berlin 1894. b) Upper Alemannic. Rudolf von Ems, Der Gute Gerhard, ed. by Haupt, Leipzig 1840. * The figures in parentheses after any title indicate the number of lines of that particular monument which have been considered. 8 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, Barlaam und Josaphat (10,000), ed. by Pfeiffer, Leipzig 1843. Johannes Hadlaub, ed. by Bartsch, Biblioth. Aelterer Schriftwerke der deutschen Schweiz, vol. vi, 283 ff. 2. Prose. Altdeutsche Predigten, ed. by Wackernagel, (sermons 1-13,> 18-20, 27-35, 42-52) IBasel 1876. Predigten des 13. Jahrhunderts, ed. by Grieshaber (100 pages), Stuttgart 1844-46. Predigt auf Johannes den Taufer, Germania, 35. Bavarian- Austrian. 1. Poetical monuments. a) Bavarian. Albreht von Johannsdorf, MF XII. Wolfdietrich B, bearbeitet von Oskar Janicke, Deutsche^ Heldenbuch, vol. iii, Berlin 1871. Wolfram von Eschenbach, Parzival, ed. by Lachmann^ Berlin 1891. Neidhart von Reuenthal, ed. by Haupt, Leipzig 1858. Wernher der Gartenaere, Helmbreht, ed. by Keinz, Leipzig 1887. Die Warnung, ed. by Haupt, ZfdA 1, 438 flP. Lamprecht von Regensburg, S. Francisken Leben, ed. by Weinhold, Paderborn 1880. Eeinbot von Durne, Der Heilige Georg, ed. by F. Vetter^ Halle 1896. Der Jiingere Titurel (2800), ed. by K. A. Hahn, Quedlin- burg 1842. Lohengrin (5000), ed. by Riickert, Quedlinb.-Leipzig 1858. h) Austrian. Die Hochzeit, ed. by Waag, Kleinere deutsche Gedichte des XL und XII. Jahrhunderts, Halle 1890. Genesis und Exodus, nach der Milstater Handschrift, ed. by J. Diemer, Vienna 1862. Die Biicher Mosis, ed. by the same, Deutsche Gedichte des XL und XII. Jahrhunderts. Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, 9 Enticrist, ed. by Hoffmann, Fundgruben II, 102 ff. Xonrad von Fussesbrunn, Kindheit Jesu, ed. by Kochen- dorffer, Quellen und Forschungen, 43. Der Nibelunge N6t^ (with reference to versions A, B, and C), ed. by Bartsch, Leipzig 1870-80. Biterolf und Dietleib, ed. by Janicke, DHB vol. i. Ortnit, ed. by Amelung and Janicke, DHB vol. ill. Wolfdietrich A and C, by the same. Kudrun, ed. by B. Symons, Halle 1883. Walther von der Yogelweide,^ ed. by Lachmann, Berlin 1891. Der Strieker, Karl der Grosse (10,000), ed. by Bartsch, Quedlinburg 1857. Freidank, Bescheidenheit, ed. by Bezzenberger, Halle 1872. Heinrich von dem Tiirlin, Din Krone (10,000), ed. by Scholl, Stuttgart 1852. Ulrich von Lichtenstein (7285), ed. by Lachmann, Berlin 1841. Der Pleier, Garel von dem bliihenden Tal (10,000), ed. by Walz, Freiburg 1892. Friedrich von Sonnenburg, ed. by Zingerle, Innsbruck 1878. Ulrich von Eschenbach, Alexander (10,000), ed. by Wen- delin Toischer, Tubingen 1888. % Prose. Berthold von Eegensburg (vol. 1, 155 pp., vol. 2, 53 pp.), ed. by Pfeiffer and Strobl, Vienna 1862-80. Altdeutsche Predigten, Wackernagel, (sermons 21-26). Altdeutsche Predigten aus dem Benedictinerstifte St. Paul us, ed. by A. Jeitteles. SWABIAN. Wernhers Maria, Fundgruben II, 145 ff. Meinloh von Soflingen, MF II. Bernger von Horheim, MF XIV. Heinrich von Bugge, MF XIII. ^The dictionary of this edition was used for statistics as to strengthening f)articles. ^ Hornig's Glossar zu Walth. was used for data. 10 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German. Hartmann vod Aue/ Lyrics, MF XXI. Erec, ed. by Haupt, Leipzig 1871. Erstes Buclilein,^ ed. by Bech, Leipzig 1871-3. Gregoriiis, ed. by Paul, Halle 1882. Der Arme Heinrich, ed. by the same. Iwein,^ ed. by Henrici, Halle 1891. Zweites Biichlein,* ed. by Bech, as above. Gottfried von Neifen, ed. by Haupt, Leipzig 1851. Ulrich Schenk von Winterstetten, ed. by Minor, Vienna 1882. Der Marner, ed. by Strauch, QuF 14. Der Kosengarten A, ed. by Georg Holz, Halle 1893. Wolfdietrich D, ed. by Amelung and Janicke, DHB vol. 4. Prose. Bruder David von Augsburg, ed. by Pfeiffer ZfdA 9. East Feankish. Konrad von Heimesfurt, Himmelfahrt Mariae, ed. by Pfeiffer, ZfdA 8, 166 ff. Wirnt von Gravenberg, Wigalois, der Ritter mit dem Eade (10,000), ed. by Benecke, Berlin 1819. Der Winsbeke and Die Winsbekin, ed. by Leitzmann, Halle 1888. Hugo von Trimberg, Der Renner (5000), herausgegeben vom historischen Yerein in Bamberg, 1833. South Fjrankish. Moriz von Craon, ed. by Schroder, Zwei altdeutsche Ritter- maeren, Berlin 1894. Reinmar von Zweter, ed. by Gustav Roethe, Leipzig 1887. ^ Vos, Diction and Kime-Technic of Hartman von Aue, was referred to for verification of data for Hartmann. ^ For the Biichlein the edition of Haupt-Martin, Leipzig 1881 was compared. ' The dictionary of Benecke- Wilken was used for data for Iwein. * The study of strengthening particles has brought to light no diflference of diction which would warrant excluding the Zw. Biichl. from the works of Hartmann. For points of similarity see under Starke, p. 76; Verre, p. 80 j and Wol, p. 63. Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, 11 West Middle German. a) Moselfrankish. Vorau Alexander, ed. by Kinzel, Halle 1884. Das Rolandslied, ed. by Bartsch, Leipzig, 1874. Konig Rother, ed. by K. von Bahder, Halle, 1884. Orendel, ed. by Arnold E. Berger, Bonn 1888. Strassburg Alexander, ed. by Kinzel as above. Sanct Brandan, ed. by Carl Schroder, Erlangen 1871. h) Rhinefrankish. Friedrichvon Hansen, ed. by Lachmann-Haupt, MF p. 42 ff. c) Hessian. Athis und Prophilias, ed. by W. Grimm, Kl. Schr. 3, 212 ff. Herbort von Fritslar, Liet von Troye, ed. by Frommann, Quedlinb.-Leip. 1837. Die Erlosung, ed. by Bartsch, Quedlinb.-Leip. 1858. Elisabeth, ed. by Rieger, Stuttgart. Thuringian. a) Poetical monuments. Heinrich von Morungen, MF p. 122 ff. Ebernand von Erfurt, Heinrich und Kunigunde, ed. by Bechstein, Quedlinb.-Leip. 1860. Heinrich von Krollwitz, Das Vater Unser, ed. by Lisch, Quedlinb.-Leip. 1839. Der Sunden Widerstreit, ed. by Zeidler, Graz 1892. Heinrich von Meissen, ed. by Ettmiiller, Quedlinb.-Leip. 1843. Heinrich von Freiberg, Tristan Fortsetzung, ed. by von der Hagen, Gottfrieds von Strassburg Werke, Breslau 1823. h) Prose. Sermons of Eckard, Wackernagel, Altdeutsche Predigten, 55, 56, 60, 61. 12 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, INTRODUCTION. In the German language of all periods, there has been a class of words, usually the most common adverbs, which in addition to their usual office have assumed the special function of serving as strengtheners of adjectives and other adverbs. This special function may amount in some cases to an entirely new use of the word, from which the original meaning or color has been wholly obliterated. Compare for example Modern German sehry or Middle High German vil. In others, some trace of the original force of the words may be retained, as in Mod. Germ, gar or recht, MHG harte. To this class of words in general the term strengthening modifier, or strengthening particle may be applied. All such usage is in origin metaphorical. A word standing for a definite adverbial notion is applied to an adjective or an adverb for the purpose of emphasizing the quality which it expresses ; in other words, the attribute of one class of ideas is asserted of another. If it is applied often enough, so that we forget that the strengthening word has any special significance of its own, the figure loses its force, or color, and the result is a faded metaphor. Strengthening particles then, as applied to the words they modify, are examples of faded metaphors. With some of these strengthening adverbs in Mod. Germ., the metaphorical nature of the figure is more apparent than with others. This means simply that the original force of the word has been retained longer in some particles than in others. The same is true for the MHG period, or indeed for any period of the language. The reason for this lies in the fact that the word survives in the language in some other usage, and this it is that measures the real strength of the particle. It is necessary that the original meaning of the word, as preserved in some other usage, be present to the mind, in order that the force of the implied comparison be felt. Mod. Germ, gar and recht are two words which have retained their freshness and force as strengthening particles for many centuries simply because they have continued current also as adjectives and adverbs of manner. Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German. 13 Oompare gar in Bas Brot ist nicht gar, and in gar schony reeht in recht froh, and reoht as a simple adjective. Such expressions as these are pleasing figures because the aptness of the com- parison is at once felt. An example of a particle with persistent individual force is to be found in MHG s^re, which retained for the most part during the whole period, as likewise in OHG, the notion which was associated with the noun das str. The same is true of English sore, which had a limited use as a strengthening particle/ Harte is a similar word. Its connection with harte the adverb of manner, and hart the adjective, colored its meaning, and made it a very emphatic particle whenever it was used as a strengthener. In all such cases where a word performs a double function, and serves both as a general strengthening particle and as an adverb of manner, it is but natural that in the course of time it should become obsolete in one or the other of these uses. In the case of s^re, the original meaning has in Mod. Germ, com- pletely disappeared, and the word survives only as an indefinite strengthening particle. Harte, on the other hand, has been lost as a strengthening particle, except in a few isolated expressions, as hart an, hart hinter, etc., and remains as an adverb of manner and as an adjective. From their very nature, it is evident that all those words which should be classed as strengthening particles, must be capable of general application to adjectives and adverbs, and recognizedly so. Their use must extend over a larger field than that of particular instances. It is of little importance stylistically if a writer or speaker uses on a particular occasion a certain word to strengthen the meaning of an adverb, as for example, in the following : wir sin geschart ad kreftee wol, Lohengrin 4844. In such a case we assume that the author uses the expression intentionally, to produce a certain desired effect. If, however, he uses the word in this way so often that he begins to do it unconsciously, and if he applies it to a large number of adverbs whose meaning he wishes to emphasize, then we cease to take it at its face value, and the word is weakened to a mere indefinite strengthening particle. ^And they were Bore afraid. Luke 2 : 9. 14 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German. Indefiniteness of meaning is then another mark of the strengthening particle. For the purpose of accurate classifica- tion, we shall have to exclude many words, and a few uses of some others, which are commonly considered as strengtheners of adjectives and adverbs. The strengthening of an adverbial or any other notion carries with it the assumption that the notion is capable of different degrees of intensity. The word to which a strengthening particle is joined must be one express- ing an idea which is not absolute in its nature, or, expressing an absolute notion, it must be one used with weakened force. Such particles as gar, ganzj al, drdto, alzoges, etc., joined to adjectives or adverbs denoting an absolute quality do not come within our definition. Such expressions as gar dne, al eine, al ze mdlj while in a certain loose sense they may be said to be stronger than the same adjectives would be without the modifiers, are not really strengthened by the particles. The qualities expressed by dne, erne, etc., mean no more than before, the limits within which they apply are only extended. If, however, we substitute for eine instead of the notion loneness the feeling of being alone, or loneliness, we have at once an idea capable of different. degrees of intensity. Vil eine, or gar eine, then in this sense, are properly examples of strengthening particles. It is evident that all such adverbs as gar, ganz, al, having the idea of completeness rather than to a high degree, when applied to adjectives or adverbs expressing an absolute quality are used in their real not in their figurative sense. There are a number of particles which have become so closely connected with the words they modify as to be considered inseparable parts of the expression or compound word. They are usually then written together with the words they modify. Examples of these in Mod. Germ, are allein, als, also, alshald, vielleicht, wohlan, wohlauf, wohlfeil. In MHG we may class under this head such words as alterseine, borlane, borgrdz, mdre- grdz, uralt, urmdre, ubarMt, Such categories as these are not included in the present discussion. There are also a number of other adverbs which are occa- sionally found as modifiers of adjectives and adverbs, but the original meaning of the words is so evident that they are likewise 1 RSI 1 r Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, 15 not included in the list of strengthening particles. They are such as the following : billiche wdren sie gemA Elis. 459 ; gar wirdedichen schdne, Elis. 397 ; zuhtidichen frd, Erl. 813 ; sd wunneclichen werde, Siind. Wid. 3106 ; grdzliche vil, Karl der Gr. 3057 ; als6 kreftecliche grdZj Karl der Gr. 7992 ; gar grimmedi- chen kalty Krone 5440 ; s6 hreftec wol, Loh. 4844 ; innediche Idt^ Tristan 13,600; wundern scAdne, Gen. 5-35 ; tugentlichen frd, Erl. 942; s6 vreislichen snel. Wig. 164-10. The words whose use in Middle High German as strength- ening particles is considered in the following pages are : vil, barte, gar, rebte, wol, genuoc, s^re, michel, starke^ al, and grimine. In the statistics under the different particles, and in the examples given, instances with the comparative are not included. These will be found discussed in a special chapter at the end. VIL. The commonest of all the strengthening particles during the MHG period, as likewise for OHG, is viL The reason for this popularity lies doubtless in the fact that the word had lost its individual color very early, and was thus free to be joined with any and all classes of adjectives and adverbs. Etymologi- cally vilj OHG filu, is connected with Latin poUere, to be strong ^ and the word may be considered as an undeclined neuter, either nominative or accusative as the case may be, of the adjective filuSf which has been lost. As used adverbially, including the strengthening particle, vil appears as accusative of measure or degree. Just what the original force of the Germanic root was, whether it had reference primarily to quantity or to number, is difficult to determine. Probably it was the former. During the early MHG period this particle was especially common with such words as manec, selten, didce, ofle, etc., where the idea of number is involved. In Otfrid the preference of filu for the same class of words is just as marked. There is little doubt that in such expressions as filu manag, etc., as originally used, the figure was 16 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, felt as a real metaphor. This would hardly be true if the idea at the basis of the particle were likewise that of number. The tables which are given below, in connection with the detailed treatment of this particle by dialects, will show that vil maintained its supremacy over the greater part of the MHG field down to the close of the thirteenth century. The actual frequency of the word in the various monuments varies greatly. The extent to which strengthening particles in general are used is a matter largely of individual taste and habit. There are differences, however, which are due to the nature of the literary material and to the particular branch of literature in question. Epic poetry, for instance, seems to offer the greatest opportunity for their use, and this is true more particularly for the popular and decadent court epic than for the court epic proper. In the popular epic they are employed to enliven the action, already the most important feature, and to give zest to the description. Lyric poetry, on the other hand, especially the more elevated in tone, is not marked by the presence of such expressions to so great an extent. In the religious prose there are great differ- ences of usage, and these are to be ascribed partly to individual taste, partly no doubt to the peculiar usage of the class of society and the locality for which the work is written. The difference in the relative frequency of vil in the various monuments, as compared with other particles, is very great even before any general decline in the use of this particle is notice- able. This is of course due to the varying frequency with which other particles appear, and the conditions regarding these are very complex. As will appear further on, the declining use of harte, wol^ and genuoOj the increasing popularity of gar, the varying use of rehte^ and the sporadic and purely local appear- ance of s^re, starJce and grimme, all enter into consideration and modify the table of percentages for vil. By the close of the thirteenth century, the decline in the use of vil is apparent over the whole territory. In certain parts of the field, as West Middle German, and in certain classes of literature, as lyric poetry and the prose monuments, the decline begins earlier and is more decided. Statistics as to the frequency of vil in the various monuments Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, 17 of the period are given in the following tables, which show the total number of strengthening particles found, the number of examples of vil, the number per thousand lines, and the ratio of vil to the whole number of particles, expressed in per cent. In each of the tables the lyrical monuments are indented. To show how the periods of popularity of the various strengthening particles overlap one another, the percentages for harte and gar are repeated in the tables for vil. Alemannic. Tn+Qi 17-.-7 Per 1000 Percent. Percent. Percent, lotai, yii. j.jjgg_ ^^.^ f^^^^ ^^^ 1. Poetical monuments. a) Lower Alemannic. Keinmar von Hagenau.... 88 69 33 78 2 2 Tristan 412 257 13 62 13 Flore und Blanscheflur 82 54 7 66 -22 6 DieGuteFrau 86 51 16 59 28 6 DasSteinbuch 27 14 14 58 22 Der Trojanische Krieg 351 257 26 73 4 8 KeiserOttemitdemBarte... 22 14 18 82 10 9 Alexius 110 95 67 86 6 6 Martina 268 217 22 81 6 7 Eeinfried von Braunschweig, 97 70 7 71 ... 21 Peter von Stauffenberg 46 34 30 74 4 15 b) Upper Alemannic. Der Gute Gerhard 218 197 28 92 1 3 Barlaam und Josaphat 304 287 28 91 * 1 3 Johannes Hadlaub 106 53 23 50 ... 36 2. Prose. Altd. Pred.Wack.1-13,18-20, 25 25 ... 100 " " " 27-35, 26 24 ... 93 " " " 42-52, 26 16 ... 58 15 15 Deut. Pred. d. 13. Jahr.,Griesh 53 9 ... 17 2 68 Pred. auf Joh. d. Taufer, Germ. 35... 3 1 ... 33 ... 66 From the above tables for Alemannic, it will be seen that vil continues as the most common strengthening particle through- out the whole period. In Lower Alemannic monuments, while the percentages are by no means regular, no signs of a general decline in the use of this particle are to be seen. The actual 18 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, frequency varies from 7 to 67 examples per thousand lines. The work showing the lowest percentage is Das Steinbuch, which is popular in tone. Here the low percentage is caused by the frequency of harte and rehte} The highest percentage for vily as well as the greatest number of strengthening particles, is found in Alexius. This is largely due to the nature of the material. Alexius, like Hartmann's Gregorius, is a story with little description but full of strong situations and pathetic inci- dents, and therefore offers more scope for emphatic expressions. The two Upper Alemannic monuments from the early part of the thirteenth century, the works of Rudolph von Ems, show few other strengthening particles, and consequently a high percentage for vilj 91 and 92. The lyric poems of Johannes Hadlaub, from the end of the century, show a decided decline in the percentage of vily which is here 50, and a corresponding increase in the use of gar, which shows a percentage of 35. The first three groups of sermons from WackernageFs edition, which are from the twelfth or the early thirteenth century, show high percentages for viL Sermons 42-52 which Wackernagel is inclined to place about 1300 (p. 268), show a somewhat lower percentage for vil, or 58. The presence of harte and the low percentage for gar, 15, indicate that this group is probably to be placed much earlier than 1300, at least in the first half of the thirteenth century. While the lyric poems of Johannes Hadlaub show a low percentage for vil, there is no indication that even in Upper Alemannic vil is as yet becoming obsolete. Poetic diction would doubtless retain a word of this kind long after it had ceased to be current in the spoken language or in the prose literature. It would, however, remain longest in connection with the more common adjectives and adverbs and in formal expressions. Compare Mod. Germ, vielleicht, Vielliebchen, With such it would have the closest connection. If vil at the end of the thirteenth century were on the point of becoming obsolete, we should 1 This is also largely a matter of editing. The manuscripts are all from the fifteenth century and show considerable variation as to strengthening particles. H. (Hamburger) occasionally substitutes gar for vil or harte. Dr. (Erfurter Druck) shows a higher per cent for harte. Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German. 19 expect to find its use limited, even in poetic diction, to these more common connections. The examples from Peter von Stauffenberg (1310), and Johannes Hadlaub (1302), do not indicate that such is the case. Vil is found here not only in the more frequent associations, such as vil halde^ vil dicke, vil gerne, vil guot, vil liep^ vil manec, vil schoenej vil wol, etc., but also in those which are not so common : vil ange, vil Ids, vil siechy vil tump, vil valsch, vil gendte, vil zuchtediGhe. This shows that vil is still felt as a living element in the language, capable of use in new surroundings and of general application as a strengthener of adjectives and adverbs. The very frequent use of vil in the sermon literature (Wackernagel) for the thirteenth century shows also that it still remained current. The low percentage for vil (17) in the volume of Grieshaber's deutsche Predigten, and the high percentage for gar (68) prob- ably indicate that these are to be dated as late as the fourteenth century.^ Vil here is limited to such common expressions as vil lutzely vil manee, vil s^re, vil swcere, vil ubel, vil unreht, Bavarian-Austrian . rr^+„i rr-i Pet 1000 Percent. Percent. Percent. Total. Vil. lijjgg^ ^i^ ^^^g_ ^^^ Bavarian. a) Poetical monuments. Albreht von Johannsdorf, 13 12 ... 92 ... 8 Wolfdietrich B 235 228 62 98 ... 3 Parzival 293 186 7 63 14 2 Neidhart von Reuenthal, 93 81 24 87 4 4 Helmbreht 46 45 25 98 2 Die Warnung (?) 83 78 21 94 4 2 S. Francisken Leben 109 75 15 69 10 10 Der Heilige Georg (?) 86 68 11 79 10 7 Der Jiingere Titurel (?) 154 136 49 88 ... 11 Lohengrin 90 44 9 49 2 39 b) Prose. Berthold von Eegensburg.... 366 91 33 24 ... 73 1 Compare Richard Sensche, "Ueber den Stil bei dem alemannischen anony- men Prediger aus dem XIII. Jahrhundert." Berlin 1897. "Grieshabers deutsche Predigten sind aus sprachlichen Griinden dem XIV. Jahrhundert zuzuweisen )f 20 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German. rr * 1 rn? Per 1000 Per cent. Per cent. Per cent, iotai. yu. lijjgg ^ii^ ^^^g gar. 2. Austrian. a) Poetical monuments. DieHochzeit 37 34 31 92 8 Genesis 159 148 ... 93 1 Exodus 156 148 94 94 4 Die Biiclier Mosis 177 168 31 94 4 Enticrist 53 49 40 93 2 4 KindheitJesu 83 62 21 75 13 1 NibelungenAi 1250 1000 100 82 8 ♦* B 1250 975 100 80 7 C 1250 900 92 75 7 Biterolf und Dietleib 701 636 47 90 6 Ortnit 126 101 42 80 17 1 Wolfdietrich A 250 224 90 90 7 Ortnit and Wolfdietrich C... 46 40 ... 87 6 2 Kudrun 552 444 65 80 11 Waltherv.d.Vogelweide, 145 123 26 85 1 7 Karl der Grosse 344 302 30 90 8 1 Freidankes Bescheidenheit.. 94 83 17 88 7 2 Diu Krone 395 348 35 88 1 4 Ulrich von Lichtenstein.. 389 340 48 87 3 3 Garelv.d.bluhendenTal(?), 338 277 28 82 7 2 Friedrich V. Sonnenburg.. 26 18 21 69 ... 24 Alexander 101 82 8 81 6 13 b) Prose. Altd. Pred. aus S. Paul 181 177 43 98 1 In the Bavarian-Austrian dialect conditions as to the use of strengthening particles are very complicated, and this is as true of vil as it is of these modifiers in general. This confusion is due largely to the wide extent of territory which is included, for it is at once apparent that no general statement of fact may be expected to apply to the whole region. Every branch, too, of literature is here represented, and not only do we find every variety of poetic art, but within the same field every degree of poetic skill, from the Parzival to Garel von dem hluhenden Tal, and to the senseless interpolations in the Nihelungen and Kudrun. Each of these classes of literature may be expected to have its own traditions as to diction and word usage. The wandering " Spielmann " was doubtless subject to quite another fashion than that to which the writer of the court epic responded. ^Approximately. Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, 21 In the Austrian monuments vil continues to be the most common strengthening particle throughout the whoJe period. The percentages range from 69 for the lyric poems of Friedrich von Sonnenburg, to 94 for the rimed versions of Genesis and Exodus. The popular and religious epics of this dialect show a very great use of strengthening particles, greater than any class of literature in any other dialect. This may be partly due to the nature of the material. Such literature has more to do with action and incidents, less with analysis and char- acterization than the court epic or than lyric poetry. It is also a mark of the literary skill or lack of skill of the author. The excessive use of strengthening particles is the result of an effort on the part of the popular poet to be impressive. Not trusting to the simple narration of his story to arouse and maintain the interest of his hearers, he intersperses it with frequent emphatic expressions which indicate his own appre- ciation of what he relates. From this attitude of mind come also such subjective exclamations as ah wie, hei wie, hei waZy etc., calculated to call attention to the important parts of the story. We may expect to find also in the frequent use of vil and other strengthening particles in this class of Austrian literature, a reflection of local popular usage. These words are there, especially in the older monuments, because they were current, and current in great numbers, in the spoken language. The sermon literature of this dialect shows also a greater frequency of these particles than the prose works of any other dialect. The Altdeutsche Predigten aus S. Paul, show 44 examples per thousand lines, Berthold von Eegensburg, 47. The actual frequency of vil in the poetical monuments, as shown by the above list, varies greatly. The Nibelungenlied shows about 100 examples per thousand lines, Wolfdietrich A 90, Kudrun QQ, Ulrich von Eschenbach's Alexander 8. The lyrical works and the court epic show usually the lowest averages. Ulrich von Lichtenstein is exceptional in showing 48 per thousand lines. His use of strengthening particles is, however, quite in keeping with his literary style, which is always effusive. Although the monuments from the end of the century show a considerable decline in the use of vil, there is no evidence that; 2 22 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, this particle is as yet becoming obsolete. Its use in the prose literature, as well as the class of words to which it is joined in the poetical monuments, shows that it is still alive in the spoken language. Friedrich von Sonnenburg represents a locality, the Tyrol, where gar has already become quite popular. There is here, however, no tendency to limit vil to the more common phrases. Nor is there any such tendency to be seen in the Alexander. The table for Bavarian monuments shows a decided decline in the use of vil by the end of the thirteenth century. Gar comes into prominence here earlier than in Austria, and already in the works of Berthold von Eegeusburg forms 73 per cent of all strengthening part-icles. In poetical diction vil retains its prominence much longer. In Lohengrin (1276-90) it shows a percentage of 49. Here, however, signs of its going out of fashion are present in the tendency to limit its use to the more common adjectives and adverbs. Nineteen of the 44 examples of vil are with manec. SWABIAN. rr^+„i T7-; Per 1000 Percent. Percent. Percent. Total. V%1. lijjgg ^i^ ^„^^g g^^ a) Poetical monuments. Werahers Maria 92 86 34 94 3 Bernger von Horheim 9 9 60 100 Meinloh von Soflingen.... 3 3 18 100 Heinrich von Eugge 25 22 44 88 Hartmann von Aue 17 17 32 100 Erec 373 350 34 93 1 2 Erstes Biichlein 59 51 26 85 8 Gregorius , 150 102 25 67 27 1 Armer Heinrich 81 62 40 71 18 1 Iwein 249 189 23 76 16 Zweites Buchlein 15 9 12 60 20 Gottfried von Neifen 88 78 44 89 1 5 Ulrich V. Winterstetten.... 138 117 50 85 4 5 Der Marner 54 48 ... 89 ... 10 Rosengarten (?) 141 101 ... 72 4 19 Wolfdietrich D 270 240 39 89 5 3 6) Prose. Bruder David von Augsburg, 15 4 ... 30 ... 70 In the Swabian dialect the decline in the use of vil toward the end of the century is only slightly noticeable, as far as any Strengthening Modifiers ^ in Mii^dle Sigh German, 23 direct evidence is at hand. The lowest percentage, as well as the lowest actual frequency, is shown by the Zweites Biichlein of Hartmann von Aue, where only 12 examples per thousand lines are found, these being 60 per cent of all strengthening particles. The next lowest is Gregorius, which shows a per- centage of 68. This is due to the unusually high percentage of hai'te, which is here 27. The lyrical monuments and Hartmann's earlier works probably represent the conditions in the current spoken language better than do his later works, where, as far as strengthening particles are concerned, he seems to be more under the influence of literary tradition. Prose monuments for Swabia are rare during this period. The treatises of Bruder David von Augsburg (1230-1240) show for about 1750 long lines only 4 examples of vil {wol, riche, destey Hep) J 11 of gar, and one of s^re {gar s^re muelich 12). The works of Bruder David and those of Berthold von Regensburg, with whom David was intimately associated, show a marked dif- ference as to frequency of strengthening particles, 9 per thousand lines in the former, 47 in the latter. The proportion between vil and gar is in both practically the same. This difference of frequency of these particles may be considered largely a matter of individual style, but no doubt it is due also in part to local differences in usage. West Middle German. Tntai VS1 Per 1000 Percent. Percent. Percent, Aoiai. vti. j.^gg ^^^ ^^^^ g^^ a) Moselfrankish. Vorau Alexander 64 Rolandslied 400 Konig Rother 144 Orendel 202 Strassburg Alexander 268 Sanct Brandan.... 102 b) Rhinefrankish. Friedrich von Hansen, 17 c) Hessian. Athis und Prophilias 36 Liet von Troye 119 Erlosung 124 Elisabeth 99 43 30 80 11 ... 373 41 95 4 ... 101 20 67 26 ... 151 38 74 9 7 237 32 89 9 ... 80 40 83 3 8 11 22 65 6 12 25 19 69 20 46 9 38 53 3 29 4 23 8 64 34 7 34 1 44 24 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, The table for Moselfraukish raonaments, which happen to be all from the latter half of the twelfth century, shows a very frequent use of vil in this dialect, the number of examples ranging from 20 to 41 per thousand lines. The percentages are also high, Konig Rother, which is the most popular in tone, showing the lowest, 67 ; the others range from 74 to 95. The lyrical poems of Friedrich von Hansen (Rhinefrankish) show comparatively few examples oivil, 22 instances per thousand lines, which are 65 per cent of all particles. Gar appears here with a percentage of 12. The monuments of the thirteenth century, which are all Hessian in dialect, show a rapidly declining use of this particle^ With the exception of the first on the list, Athis und Prophilias,. with 19 examples per thousand lines, the instances are rare. The Liet von Troye (1215) shows an average of 9 per thousand lines and a percentage of 38. Die Erlosung (1295) shows a still further decline of vil, as only 4 examples per thousand lines are found and these only 23 per cent of the whole number of such particles. Elisabeth, of about the same date, shows a larger number of strengthening particles, and, as may perhaps be expected, a somewhat higher percentage for vily which is here 34. Vil at this time was no doubt the weakest of all the strengtheners, and the greater the habit of using such expressions, the greater the proportion of the more insipid ones which would be included. So, conversely, a writer who uses such devices only rarely, as Wolfram von Eschenbach, would be more careful in his choice and make a proportionally greater use of those which are stronger. While the decline of vil in the literary language was earlier and more decided here than in any oiher dialect, there is na evidence to show that even by the end of the thirteenth century it had become obsolete. In neither Die Erlosung nor Elisabeth is vil limited to the common locutions, but it is joined to words with which it has been by no means frequently associated, vil mehtic, Erl. 2637, vil gewar Elis. 4765, vil ungetriuwe 1131, vil getriuwe 1722, vil ebene 4044. This shows that vil is not yet a fossil element in the language. That other particles were, however, more popular in the literary language throughout the whole Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, 25 century, is shown by the tables for harte and gar. In the Liet von Troye (1215) it is harte^ which forms 53 per cent of all particles used. In the Erlosung (1295) it is gar, which occurs 80 times and shows a percentage of 64. In Elisabeth, of about the same date, it is gar also, with a percentage of 44. The predominance of gar over vil was doubtless still greater in the spoken language. Thueingian. T-ntoi T7f7 Per 1000 Percent. Percent. Percent. a) Poetical monuments. Heinrich v. Morungen.. 43 37 ... 85 ... 2 Heinrich und Kunigunde, 288 214 45 71 22 1 Vater Unser 122 188 90 125 18 34 73 66 21 18 2 Der Siinden Widerstreit... 7 Heinrich von Meissen... 88 63 13 72 ... 24 Tristan 121 43 8 35 4 54 6) Prose. Sermons of Eckard, Wackern. 55, 56, 60, 61, 4 ... ... ... .,. 100 In the Thuringian monuments the decline of vil is not apparent so early as in Hessian, but makes itself unmistakably felt by the end of the thirteenth century. Harte is quite popular here in the early part of the century, gar takes the lead at the end. Vil, both as to actual frequency, and as to its ratio to the other particles, grows steadily less from Heinrich und Kunigunde (1216) to Heinrich von Freiberg's Tristan (1301-20), with but slight exceptions. The tendency to restrict vil to the more <;ommon locutions is perceptible in Heinrich von Meissen, evi- dent in Tristan. In the latter monument 43 examples are found in 5000 lines, and of these, 8 are with Hep, 6 with lihte, 5 with schiere, 3 each with starke, schdne, wol, 2 each with manec and reine, and the others with getriuwe, gerne, hlein, sueze, swinde, zorn. East Frankish. Total. Vil. Himmelfahrt Mariae 34 27 IVigalois 377 309 DerWinsbekeunddieWinsbekin, 17 15 DerRenner 137 96 Per 1000 Percent. Percent. Percent, lines. vil. harte. gar. ... 80 17 ... 31 82 14 ... 12 88 ... 12 19 70 3 25 26 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German. South Frankish. rr^^^ 1 Trw Per 1000 Percent, Percent. Percent^ Total. Vtt. i.jjgg_ ^^i^ ^^^^g^ g^^^ Moriz von Craon 56 35 14 62 34 Keinmar von Zweter 130 116 34 89 1 In East Frankish monuments no decided decline in the use of vil is seen until the works of Hugo von Trimberg, whose Renner shows gar with a percentage of 25. In South Frankish the first monument on the list, Moriz von Craon, shows an unusually low percentage for vil, 62. Here harte furnishes 34 per cent of all particles. Thio monument comes from near the border line between South Frankish terri- tory and Alemannic, and Alemannic influence has probably been at work. The percentage for vil is here about the same as for Lower Alemannic works of about the same date. Compare Tristan 62 per cent, Fl. und Bl. QQ per cent. In the lyrie poems of Eeinmar von Zweter vil is actually very frequent and the percentage is also high. Perhaps Reinmar represents Austrian usage as to strengthening particles rather than that of his native dialect. Throughout the whole period of its popularity vil seem& capable of modifying any adjective or adverb whatever. Such observations as may be made concerning the preference of one particle over another with certain classes of words, will be found under the discussion of the other particles. The following table is given to show the relative frequency of the different particles with a few of the most common adjectives and adverbs. The data given are for eight of the more important monuments of the early thirteenth century, well distributed as to dialect. Since the words chosen are the most common ones of their class, they are not those with which the newer strengthening particles are usually found, and the list therefore fails to show the true proportion between the various particles. Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, 27 vil balde 1 2 3 ... 1 1 ... 11 harte " Ill ... 1 wol " 10 al « 2 1 vil gerne 19 30 9 11 3 ... 2 8 harte " 1 3 ... 6 ... 1 genuoc " 1 vil guot 2 20 5 17 4 1 10 16 tarte " 1 3 2 ... 2 7 3 1 rehte " 1 1 genuoc " 1 3 3 sere «' 1 vil gr6z 3 15 5 7 26 1 3 25 harte " 1 2 1 ... 4 5 6 ... vil kame 6 10 4 3 7 1 ... 7 harte " 1 3 vil kleine 3 2 4 4 1 4 harte *' 13 12 1 vil liep.. 12 10 ... 17 4 ... 2 43 harte " 2 vil manec 19 36 3 46 40 2 6 21 harte " 1 1 1 genuoc " 1 wol " 1 vil nahe 15 22 14 10 6 ... 1 11 harte " 2 ... 2 1 s6re " 2 vil rich 6 ... 10 11 harte " 1 2 ... 1 4 .. 3 gar " vil schiere 17 26 3 8 7 2 1 9 harte " 12 4 11 gar " 1 ^ The data are for all the works of Hartmann except the lyrics. ^ Der Gute Gerhard and Barlaam und Josaphat. 28 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, i -^ i I §^ ..." ^- ^ -^ -^ t i^ .§g o« vil s6re 7 35 1 18 11 ... 5 17 harte " 13 3 ... 8 3 2 1 gar 1 vil siieze 12 4 ... 1 8 ... 8 21 harte " 2 1 rehte " 6 vil wol 24 60 13 23 19 6 35 25 harte « 11 25 5 2 5 5 6 ... rehte " 5 2 2 1 genuoc " 1 HARTE. Harte, as a strengthening particle, plays an important part during this period. It has been assumed that the development in meaning from harte^ OHG harto, the modifier of verbs, and meaning with force, to harto the indefinite strengthening particle, was brought about by the use of the word with participles, that is, while originally only a modifier of verbs, the word came to be applied to participles used as adjectives, and then extended to other adjectives and adverbs.^ As different stages pointing to such a development. Kip gives the following : a) With participles used adjectively, der harte stdzende rdm, V.M. 61-14, 6) With adjectives and adverbs derived from verbs, or closely related to verbs in form, vil harte erchomelicho, Ex. 544 (to erkomen), c) In constructions where there is doubt as to whether it modi- fies a verb or a substantive idea, wachet wan der tievd der dd ist harte iur widerwarte, Phys. 83-12. As a support to this theory we naturally look to see whether 1 Kip, page 168. Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German. 29 harte is actually found frequently united with participial adjec- tives, and other adjectives derived from verbs, or similar to verbs in form. If such has been the development, we should expect to find, at least in the earlier monuments, harte in the greater number of instances joined to such words. That this is not the case can be readily seen from the list given by Kip of the examples from the religious poetry of the 11th and 12th centuries. Of the 72 instances cited only six : harte erhar- meclichf harte erchomenliGhe, harte riuwec, harte sorclieh, harte unherihtet, harte vorhtsaniy may be reasonably connected with any verbs, and even here the connection is often but slight. Turning to the list of examples of harte as a verb modifier, we are also surprised at the small number of instances where it is connected with a participial construction. Of the 216 exam- ples, only 20, or less than 10 per cent, are found as modifiers of participles, either past or present. Turning to an older period of the language, we find that Otfrid uses harto 84 times ^ as a strengthener of adjectives and adverbs. Here also very little trace of a verbal idea is to be found in the words with which harto in connected. The list includes 25 instances with filuy 7 with mihily 4 with manag^ 4 with mtr (compar.), 3 with sdln^ 2 with seltsaeni, 2 with ungimah. With only three of the whole number, bizenti, sdn, and firdan, is there any verbal association, either direct or indirect. As a modifier of verbs, harto is found 124 times in Otfrid, and of this number only 10 are instances of harto with participles, or less than 9 per cent. Instead of being used preferably with partici- ples and participial adjectives, harto seems to be avoided in such connection. If we may judge from the actual facts as to OHG harto y it is very improbable that the word owes its function as a strengthen- ing particle to its frequent use with participles, or that it passed from a modifier of verbs to a modifier of adjectives and adverbs by way of the participial adjective. If the latter usage is not as old as the former, it is at least as fundamental, and implies a certain degree of independence. Perhaps we may better look ^ See the dictionary of Piper, where however several instances are lacking. 30 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, for the origin of such a use in the law of association of ideas. The metaphorical nature of the use of strengthening particles has been previously referred to. In such expressions as harto filUj harto manag, the attribute of one class of objects or ideas is asserted of another, for the purpose of forming, that it may be longer retained, a more striking picture. It is natural, for instance, to associate the idea of power or strength with the ideas of size, quantity, or extent. A host of common English and German expressions are evidence of this fact. Compare a mighty lot, mighty large, powerful great, mdchtig gross, ungeheuer viel, and MHG starke breit und grdz, starke lane, starke tie/. The fact that in Otfrid 50 per cent of the examples of harto are united with adjectives or adverbs expressing size, quantity, distance, etc., and that during the MHG period this particle is so frequently found with such words, seems to justify the con- clusion that this was the original feeling when harte was used as a strengthening modifier. It is but a step from harte vil to harte kleine, harte lutzel, or from harte verre to harte unverre. These expressions, which are very common in MHG, preserve the feeling that harte is appropriate for ideas of quantity, though the direction is reversed. There is another class of ideas with which the notion of power or force {harto, vehementer) is easily and naturally associated. These are subjective, and have to do with the attitudes of the mind and especially the feelings. Sometimes they denote actions or judgments of the mind, and here the connection with the use of ha7'te as a modifier of verbs is closer. Compare harte with such verbs as hetruehen, erbarmen, ervurhten, jdmern, klagen, minnen, milejen, niden, riuwen, schamen, senen, smerzen, sorgen, trUren, trilwen, vrouwen, furhten, wundern, zwiveln. Such exam- ples are frequent in both OHG and MHG, and form the largest class of verbs with which harte is united, as may be seen from Kip^s list. Thus we may account for the frequency in MHG of such combinations as harte wol, harte gerne, harte s^re, harte frd, harte schoene, harte sueze, harte guot, starke jr6, starke kit, starke holt, etc. The same principle is at work in certain colloquial English expressions : mighty glad, mighty fine, mighty bad (East- Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, 31 ern U. S.), 'powerful nice, powerful handy, powerful sick, even powetful weak (Southern). Perhaps the tendency to associate harte with adjectives and adverbs in -Uch, -liche{n), which shows itself strongly in certain parts of the MHG field, is to be referred to this principle. The subjective element in the. statement^ for instance, that an action or a thing is ritterlich, like a knight, is large. English a strong resemblance, strikingly similar, may be compared. As to the different classes of adjectives and adverbs with which harte is actually associated during the period in question, we may note : a) Those expressing quantity, extent of time or space, etc., hreit, grdz, hdhe, kleine, kume, kurz^ lane, lutzel, manec, michel, ndhen, ringe, verre, unverre, unhdch, unlanc, vol, wite, wtnec, b) Those which express a good or desirable quality : billich, biderbe, Michen, friuntlichen, gerne, guot, guetliche, Mrlich, kluoc, kunecliche, meisterliche, lobeliche, milte, sueze, rehte, ritterliche, rich, staete, fr6, froeliche, wol, wunneclich, vrum, wis, zuhteclichen, zierlich, etc. c) Those expressing an undesirable quality : angestliche, bitter- liche, egebar, grimmeclichen, griuweliche, jdmerliche, klageliche, lasterlichen, leit, misselich, ungerne, ndtlich, riwic, sorcHche, schede- liche, s^re, swaere, unsuoze, ungezogenliche, ungemach, unsenfteclich, trUrec, vreislichen, wi, lount, zornec. d) Adjectives and adverbs of a kindred meaning : kreftecliche, Mte, vaste, stark, wilde, e) Those of opposite meaning : krank, Use, sanfie, swach, stille, f) Those of time, frequency, etc. : vruo, spdte, dicke, selten (not ofte\ gdch, swinde, schiere. With certain words, harte has not been found : arm, edel, ebene, gevuoge, genaedec, gehiure, hoveliche, heilec, innecliche, muede, ofte, kuene, rdsevar, saelec, saelecliche, saeldenbaere, sende, stolz, schameCiche, schantliche, tugentliche, wiplichen, waerlichen. With others, kiusche. Hep, reine, tougen, werdecliche, only in Mid- dle German and there only rarely. Many of these are frequently recurring words in the court epic, and are essentially a part of the diction of this class of literature. The absence of harte with these words then, would 32 Strengthming Modifiers in Middle High German, indicate either the popular origin of this particle, and the feel- ing that it is more properly a part of the common speech, or at least that it had ceased to be current in the more elevated style, or was confined to certain locutions, at the time when the court epic vvas developing. Alemannic. 1. Poetical Monuments. Total. Harte. Per 1000 Per lines. cent. 3 ... 2 65 3 13 18 2 22 24 8 28 6 6 22 14 1 4 2 3 10 6 4 6 17 2 6 2 ... 4 2 1 4 ... 1 ... ... 4 15 1 ... 2 a) Lower Alemannic: Keinmar von Hagenau 88 Tristan 412 Flore und Blanscheflur i 82 DieGute Frau 86 Das Steinbuch 27 Der Trojanische Krieg 351 Keiser Otte 22 Alexius 110 Martina 268 Reinfried von Braunschweig 97 Peter von Stauffenberg 46 h) Upper Alemannic : Der Gute Gerhard 218 Barlaam und Josaphat 304 Johannes Hadlaub 106 2. Prose. AM. Predigt. Wack. 42-52 ... 26 Pred. d. 13 Jahr. (Grieshaber) 53 From the above table it will be seen that the lyric poems of Reinmar show few examples of harte, and a remarkably low percentage for their place on the list. The two monuments which show the greatest actual frequency, and at the same time the highest percentages for this particle, Die Gute Frau, and Das Steinbuch, are popular in tone. Aside from these, a gradual decline is shown in the use of harte throughout the thirteenth century. The percentage for Tristan is lower than that for the monument immediately following, although the actual examples are more frequent. Der Troj. Krieg shows a lower percentage than would be expected. The actual frequency oi harte in Alexius^ is greater than in Keiser Otte, though the 1 Compare Hartmann's Gregorius, which is a similar story, and where harte is unusually frequent. strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German. 33 percentage is less. This is due to the great use of vil in this monument, which has been referred to under the discussion of that particle. Peter von Stauffenberg shows only two exam- ples, both of which are harte vrdj one of the most common of combinations with hartej which may be considered at this date is a mere formal expression. By the end of the thirteenth century, harte in Lower Ale- man nic has practically disappeared from the literary language. In Upper Alemannic, the examples from the works of Rudolf von Ems, which are from the early part of the century, are rare, constituting only about one per cent of all particles used. The lyric poems of Johannes Hadlaub, from the end of the century, show none. An interesting question at this point is the relation between the use of this word in epic poetry and its use in the popular idiom or spoken language. The only examples of harte which have been found in the prose works of this period are from ser- mons 43, 45, and 46, in WackernagePs collection, harte wider- zaeme 43-83, harte uhel 45-40, harte unerberldich 45-76, harte sicherlichen 46-134, and from the volume of Grieshaber, harte ubel, page 97. The former collection seems to date from the first half of the thirteenth century, the latter from the beginning of the fourteenth. The very infrequent use of strengthening particles in the prose literature of this dialect furnishes but little data upon which to base any conclusion as to the status of harte in the spoken language. What direct evidence there is, points to an early disappearance of this particle, that is, if we may look upon the single example from the volume of Grieshaber as a mere historical remnant. We may reach a conclusion, however, by considering the adjectives and adverbs with which harte is associated in the poetical monuments. A word of this kind, if it has once been popular, would live on in poetic diction long after it had ceased to be current in the popular speech. It would, however, endure only in connection with those adjectives and adverbs with which it had been the most frequently associated during the period of its popularity. The unit then to be considered in determining whether harte is becoming obsolete, is not the strengthening 34 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German. particle by itself, but the strengtbener together with the modi- fied word. The question is not whether harte lived on in the popular or literary language, but in what expressions it survived the longest. It may be, and actually is true that harte wol con- tinued current in epic poetry until the end of the thirteenth century, while other expressions, as harte manec, harte Mme, disappeared very much earlier. If harte is retained in the literary language, during the latter half of the thirteenth century, for example, only in those expres- sions which during the earlier period and for other dialects were the most common, we may look upon these examples as mere fossil remnants constituting a part of poetic diction, and conclude that the word has ceased to be a general strengtbener of adjec- tives and adverbs. In all the poetical monuments of Lower Alemannic examined, 1 57 examples of harte have been found, or outside of Tristan, which dates from the beginning of the century, and which shows not only the greatest number of examples but also the greatest freedom in the use of the particle, only 92. These 157 exam- ples of harte were united with 70 different adjectives and adverbs, 33 of which are found in Tristan, 37 others in the rest of the material. The following are the more usual combinations, arranged in order of frequency: harte wol 22 times, s^re 19, fro 6, Heine 5, unlanc 5, vil 5, grdz 4, schdne 4, starhe 4, fremde 3, guot 3, michel 3, suoze 3, wunderliohen 3, gerne 3, Mme 2, kurz 2, Hhte 2, ndhen 2, schiere 2, wert 2, etc. In the 19 examples from the last three monuments on the list, representing the end of the century, no new combinations with harte appear, but all are examples of frequently recurring and well known phrases : harte balde, fremde, frd, lihte, michel, suoze, swaere, verre, wunderlichen, vil, zorn. While harte with balde, fremde, michel and swaere are not actually found elsewhere in Alemannic, a comparison with Middle German and Bavarian usage shows that these are old and familiar expressions.^ The others are frequent in Alemannic. From the three works of 1 With Hugo von Langenstein, Bavarian- Austrian influence shows itself no doubt in the use of strengthening particles as well as in the form and inci- dents of his legend. Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, 35 Konrad von Wiirzburg, from the middle of the century, 22 examples of harte are noted in the above list. Not one of these is a new combination, all of them appearing either in early Alemannic works or in early monuments from other dialects. This is in marked contrast to the state of affairs with regard to vilj gar, rehte, or any particle in good current usage. With these latter, each new monument brings a host of new words with which the particle is associated. These considerations lead to the conclusion that harte became obsolete as a general strengthening particle in Alemannic during the first half of the thirteenth century. In epic poetry the word lived on in the more common locutions long after it had gone out of general use, and the examples from the latter part of the century are to be regarded as fossil remnants of an older and more general use. They here make up a part of traditional poetical diction, which is preserved longer in the court epic than in other forms of literature. In Upper Alemannic, if we may judge from the works of Rudolf von Ems, harte was never so common, and here it dis- appeared earlier. Another question which naturally arises in this connection is, do metrical considerations have anything to do with the choice of strengthening particles? It might be suspected that where there is room in a line for a two syllable word, harte or rehte would be selected, if however a single syllable were needed to fill out the line vil or gar would be chosen. It would seem for instance, in the following lines from Wigalois, that the author used a strengthening particle, according as he had room for one or not in the line, and that he chose vil or harte without dis- crimination except as regards the metrical length of the word. si lachten unde wdrenfrd, 105-23. des was her Wigalois vilfrd, 91-11. des wart diu maget harte frd, 72-5. Rudolf von Ems, however, while using harte with other adjectives, avoids it with vrd, and uses other means of filling out his lines. Compare the following from Barlaam und Josaphat : 36 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German. Des maht dH iemer wesen vrd^ 13-29. der herre was der rede vrd, 15-37. des was ieh herzeliche vrd, 17-32. der voter was des kindes vrd, 20-29. s%ner Jcunfte was er vro^ 108-28. daz sie mit im wdren vrd, 109-38. So in Der Gute Gerhard : von mir des bin ich immer vr6, des liehen trdstes was ich vr6, 6269, des was min werdiu vrouwe vrd, 6311. die ritterschaft begunde dd in rittersehefte wesen vrdy 6397-8. In these latter examples signs of mere line filling are so apparent, and harte suggests itself so naturally that its avoid- ance is striking. We may infer that this combination is unknown at this time to the poet's dialect. Bavarian- Austrian. 1. Bavarian. ^^^^^ j^.^^^^ Per 1000 Per a) Poetical monuments. lines, cent. Wolfdietrich B^ 235 1 Parzival 293 41 2 14 Neidhart von Reuenthal (?) 93 4 1 4 Helrabreht 46 1 ... 2 DieWarnung(?) 83 3 1 4 S. Franciskenleben 109 11 2 10 Der Jiingere Titurel (?) 154 Lohengrin 90 2 ... 2 6) Prose. Berthold von Kegensburg 366 Altdeutsche Pred. Wack. 21-26 6 2. Austrian. a) Poetical monuments. Die Hochzeit 87 3 3 8 Genesis 159 2 ... 1 * MS8. K and H read : si schlugent auffgar baldejr reysches gezelt {gar schdne H) 39-1. Janicke reconstructs : harte riliche aluoc man Hf diu gezelt. In view of the rare occurrence of harte in this monument it is probable that gar was the original particle used. Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, 37 Total. Harte. Per 1000 Per lines, cent. Exodus 156 6 ... 4 Die Bucher Mosis 177 7 3 4 Entricrist 63 1 1 2 Kindheit Jesu 83 11 ... 13 Nibelungenlied, Version A 1250 92 10 8 " " B 82 9 7 " C... 71 7 7 Biterolf und Dietleib 701 40 3 6 Ortnit 126 22 9 17 Wolfdietrich A 250 17 7 7 Ortnit and Wolfdietrich C 46 3 ... 6 Kudrun 552 62 9 11 Walther von der Vogelweide 145 1 ... 1 Karl der Grosse 344 27 3 8 Freidankes Bescheidenheit 94 7 1 7 Diu Krone 395 5 ... 1 Ulrich von Lichtenstein 389 13 2 3 Garel (?) 338 22 2 7 Friedrich von Sonnenburg 26 Alexander 101 6 ... 6 b) Prose. Altd. Fred, aus S. Paul 181 2 ... 1 The tables for BavariaD -Austrian show a great confusion in the use of harte in this dialect. The most striking feature, however, is that those monuments which show the highest per- centages belong for the most part to the popular or the religious epic. They are Ortnit, Kindheit Jesu, Kudrun, Nibelungen, Wolfdietrich A. Parzival shows also a very high percentage, though the actual frequency is not so great, 2 examples per thousand lines. The lyrical works here also show few examples of harte: Albreht von Johannsdorf and Friedrich von Sonnenburg none, Walther 1, Neidhart 4. Ulrich von Lichtenstein, whose works are partly lyrical, shows 13. Next to the early popular epic and the prose monuments, lyric poetry may be expected to show the most accurately local usage as to strengthening particles. This will appear more plainly in the case of gar, perhaps less so with harte, which always seems to be more or less in disfavor with lyric writers, Harte appears to lack the elegance of such particles as rehte and 3 38 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, gar^ and the latter are apparently preferred wherever they are current and when a stronger particle than vil is desired. The absence of harte from the works of Berthold von Regensburg, Bruder David von Augsburg, and Fr. v. Sonnenburg doubtless indicates that there was a wide stretch of territory through southern Bavaria, Swabia, and the Tyrol, where from the mid- dle of the thirteenth century on, and probably much earlier, harte was unknown to the popular dialect. The statistics for Upper Alemannic indicate the same for the neighboring Swiss provinces. Throughout the whole territory gar was very popu- lar at this time. Throughout the territory farther east, Carin- thia, Styria, Austria proper, as shown by the works of Ulrich von Lichtenstein, the Predigten aus S. Paul., ISTeidhart, and the Austrian popular epics, harte remained current much longer. Gar here is scarcely known, even in the last quarter of the thirteenth century. In northern Bavaria and Bohemia, harte was also very popular, and continued current until late, as might be expected from the proximity to East Prankish, and Thuringia. Compare the statistics for Parzival, Wigalois, and Alexander. In the epic poetry of the latter part of the thirteenth century, territorial distinctions as to the use of harte, and indeed as to diction in general, are no longer felt. Nor are the stylistic differences between the court and the popular epic so apparent. By this time the two classes of literature had approached so closely as to intermingle, and what of form and diction had originally belonged only to the one or the other, now became common property. Just as the different incidents and episodes from the works of the earlier court poets were freely made use of by the writers of the declining epic, so words, phrases, and whole periods, from one class of literature, were appropriated by the less talented writers of other classes. This universal custom of borrowing applies no doubt to a less degree to strengthening particles, which are always more or less unconsciously used, but it still has to be taken into account even with these, especially in epic poetry. For this reason it is very difficult to locate geographically or chronologically such expres- sions. These borrowings are not nearly so general among lyric Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, 39 writers, and in the early popular epic much less marked than in the later. These therefore offer a more reliable criterion for local usage than the later court epic.^ The evidence for the gradual disappearance of harte as a strengthening particle from the spoken dialect is as strong here as in Alemannic. In Bavaria this takes place earlier than in the Austrian provinces. This is shown by the absence of the particle in the works of Berth, v. Regensburg, as compared with the examples from the Predigten aus St. Paul. The fact that in Bavaria gar appears so prominently in the popular speech, renders the disappearance of harte at an early stage the more probable. In the epic poetry the tendency to restrict harte to the commonest locutions is apparent from the middle of the century. Garel shows 22 examples which are found with vr6y gdchj grdz, meisterliehy rich, ringe, s^re, seltsaene, sorcsam, tiwer, unhdch, veste, vruo. Ulrich von Lichtenstein shows harte with vil, vruOy vrdj gerne, hdhe, Meine, kranc, swach, w^nec. In ^ The examples of harte in the Kudrun offer strong evidence of the presence of this particle in the popular dialect of Austria at the time the present ver- sion was produced, as contrasted with the dialect of the original. Various efforts have been made to separate the original elements of the poem from those parts which belong only to the Austrian redaction. (See Martin's introduc- tion to his edition, and Wilmanns, Die Entwickelung der Kudrundichtung. ) Those strophes which are generally considered as belonging to the original version or versions show examples of harte only rarely : harte Use 668-4, harte sere 995-3, harte balde 1361-3. On the other hand a very frequent use of this particle is found in those strophes which are looked upon as interpolations or contaminations of older material. 59 of the 62 examples of harte are found in such strophes. The author of the Austrian version evidently used those strengthening particles which were current in his own dialect. In the Nibelungen no such difference is to be noticed between the so-called original stanzas of Lachmann and those of later origin. 63 per cent of the examples of harte are from the original strophes, 37 per cent from all others. A striking fact however concerning the use of harte here is that more than 50 per cent of all instances are from the last line of the stanza, generally the last half line, which has four accents. This might be the result of mere line fill- ing on the part of the original author, or, perhaps in some instances, of an attempt of an interpolator to make a four accent line out of one which origi- nally had only three (Compare Heusler, Altdeutsche Verskunst). Other monuments of a similar strophic form show different statistics in this regard. In Kudrun 40 per cent of all examples of harte are from the last line of the stanza, in Ortnit and Wolfdietrich A about 19, Wolfd. D about 20. 40 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, Bavarian, Lohengrin shows harte wol and harte weidenlich,. This is evidence that this particle is not felt as a living element in the language. The following list shows the more frequent combinations with harte in Bavarian-Austrian monuments, in order of frequency* The figures in parentheses show the number of occurrences noted outside of the three Nibelungen versions. harte stre^ woL 48 times, (30) 36 " (27) harte lange, vily vrdj balde, groz, leitf kleinej guoty " schiere, " gerne, ^* vroelichen, " Mrlich, " w^neCj verre, hdhe, groezliehy Mtej " swinde, " gdchf 25 22 21 21 22 16 15 14 14 13 12 10 10 10 9 9 9 7 (16) (14) (5) (10) (2) (10) (10) (7) (12) (1) (1) (6) (6) (3) (4) (4) (5) (0) swaere, 6 dickey 7 ndhen, 6 selten, 6 unmaezlichf 6 " breity " guetlich, " ritterlichy " tiure, " trijireGy " jdmerlichj wite. " vlizeclicheny 3 " lobelicheUy 3 " ^iifee/, 3 " minnedich, 3 vrwo. times, (7) " (5) " (0> " (0) " (3) " (6) " (0) " (1) " (0) " (4) " (1) " (2) " (1) " (0) " (0) " (0> " (0) " (1) " (1) " (3> SWABIAN. , _ . , , Total. Marie. Per 1000 Per a) Poetical Monuments. lines, cent. Wernhere Maria 92 3 ... 3 Erec 373 4 11 Erstes Biichlein 59 5 3 8 Gregorius 160 40 10 27 Armer Heinrich 81 15 10 18 Iwein 249 41 5 16 Zweites Biichlein „ 15 3 4 20 Gottfried Ton Neifen 88 1 ... 1 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, 41 Total. Harte. Per 1000 Per lines, cent. Ulrich von Winterstetten 138 5 ... 4 Rosengarten 141 6 ... 4 WolfdietrichDi 270 14 ... 5 The above list for Swabian shows a very extended use of ho/rte by Hartmann von Aue. The Gregorius and Armer Heinrich each show 10 examples per thousand lines, a degree of frequency only reached by the Nibelungen, Liet von Troye, Heinrich und Kunigunde, and Moriz von Craon. The percent- ages are also high, 27 and 20. Only Flore and Blanscheflur (28), Moriz von Craon (34), Liet von Troye (53) show a higher. Gottfried von Neifen has harte minneclich 37-21, Ulrich v. Wint. shows harte with schedelieh 2-14, wol 5-7, ringe 14-14, Meine 24-15, 31-23. The Rosengarten shows harte with woly grdzj vr6, ritterlich, and s^re. The nature of these examples from the lyrical works and Rosengarten is such that we may consider them, especially for the last half of the thirteenth century, merely as a part of the general traditional language. There is no evidence that harte was at this time a part of the Swabian popular speech. The treatises of Bruder David von Augsburg (ZfdA 9, 8-55.) show no traces of it. Berthold von Regensburg, who spent much of his time in traveling and preaching in Swabia, does not use it. Further prose monuments for this dialect and period are not at hand, but there is no reason to suppose that the conditions as to strengthening particles here differ in any marked degree from those in Bavaria. The absence of this particle from the sermons of Berthold is significant. Berthold's diction is very popular, and unlike Bruder David, he uses strengthening particles very freely. Frequently he has occasion to double them in order to give the desired degree of emphasis, as vil unde vil baz ii 20-8, gar unde gar sehedelichen I 120-8. If harte had been possible we should expect Berthold to have used it. In about 375 examples of such particles however, harte does not once appear. 1 Wolfdietrich D, while a Swabian version, probably represents the tradi- tional Austrian use of strengthening particles rather than Swabian, following in this regard the earlier versions of the same legend. 42 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, An interesting fact which appears from the above table is the great difference in the frequency of harte in Erec and the other works of Hartraann.^ Only four examples of this particle are found in Erec: harte stre 484, wol 1009, vil 3455, frd 4861. Haupt, in his edition, assumes that the small number of examples of harte here are to be explained by the lateness of the manu- script (Ambraser 1504), or at least he makes an attempt at reconstruction by changing gar in a few instances to harte? The frequency of harte however in other works preserved in the same manuscript, Moriz von Craon, Kudrun, Bit. und Diet., Kon. Rother, Helmbreht, shows that there has been no general attempt to replace obsolete strengthening particles with those that were current.^ It is perhaps significant that the four words with which harte is joined in the Ambraser manuscript of Erec, woly stre, frd, vil, are just the four which in Upper German were most commonly found with this particle.'* This restriction of harte to these old and well known locutions would ordinarily indicate that the word had ceased to be felt as a general strengthening particle. It is then all the more curious that in Hartmann's later works ^ Compare Vos, Diction and Rime-Technic of Hartman von Aue, pp. 20, 69, where this difference of usage is first noticed. * See Vos, note p. 20 ; Haupt, note to line 5500. ^ In the case of the Nibelungen and Iwein a conscious attempt seems to have been made to substitute another particle for harte, in both cases vast. Bartsch Germ. X 44, notices this for the Nibelungen. The passages are, 1526-4 harte balde — vast balde d (Ambraser MS.), 1479-2 h. groz — vast grdz d, 85-3 h. guot — vast guot d, 1279-4 1 h. hMiehen — vast h. d, 1183-1 1 A. Mte — vast I. d, 643-2 h. vil — vast v. d, 1647-2 1 h. wol — vast w. d. In Iwein, according to Henrici's variant readings, the following differences are noted : 6833 harte gar — iemer mtr d, 7238 harte lange — alsd lange d, 3514 harte richez — riterlichez d, 7916 h. stceter — vast s. d, 2299 h. unrnplieh — vast u. d, 6050 h. verre — vast v. d, 8131 h. verre — vil v. d, 1029 h. vil — vast v. d, 1943 h. wol — vast w. d, 6271 h. wol — genug wol d. In the case of Erec no attempt has been made certainly to substitute vaste for harte, since only one instance of it occurs, vaste schone 1536. Vaste as a strengthening particle has been found elsewhere only in the Bav.-Aust. epic: Parzival vaste frd 395-16, Kudrun vaste greme 410-1, 1456-3 vast an, Bit. und Diet, vaste guot 1060, Wolfd. A vaste dicke 252-2. These changes then which the Ambraser manuscript shows in the case of the Nibelungen and Iwein cannot have been introduced by the scribe. They date no doubt from some earlier Austrian copyist. ^ Compare the lists on pages 34 and 40. Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, 43 this particle is not only very frequent, but joined very freely to different classes of adjectives and adverbs.^ The following are the examples of harte with parallel examples from other, mostly Upper German, monuments : Harte balde Iw. 125,' Parz. 124-23. " drdte Iw. 208, 247, Siind. Wid. 1584. " gar Iw. 250, Erlos. 4689. " gerne Iw. 61, 246, 292, AH 213, Kud. 1173-4. " grdz Gr. 2163, AH 213, Nib. 450-2. " guot Iw. 37, Gr. 1549, AH 1218, Parz. 70-7. " Ueine Gr. 3124, 3660, AH 697, Parz. 529-14. " Magelichen Iw. 194, h. Magebaere Iw. 253, KdGr. 1237. " mtzel Iw. 139, Nib. 1489-4. *' lange Iw. 265, Nib. 848-2. " Use Gr. 358, Kud. 668-4. " lobebaere Gr. 1818, lobeliche Kud. 1103-2. " maneo Erst. B. 697, Ex. 137-16. " ndt Gr. 584, Wig. 114-11. " riuwevar Iw. 182, Gr. 428, 2327, riuwee Gr. 2529, Gen. 27-5. " ringe Iw. 145, Nib. 25^-4. " rich Iw. 134, Gr. 2033, Kud. 1108-2. " sehdne Iw. 88, schoene Iw. 169, Gr. 3281, 3379, AH 1375, Parz. 236-22. " staete Iw. 288, Gr. 2184, Kud. 19-4. " sanfte Iw. 132, Siind. Wider. 2533. ^A comparison of the lines containing harte in Erec and Iwein with the corresponding passages in the works of Chretien de Troyes shows that Hart- mann in the use of this particle is not following anything in his original. Chretien uses as strengthening particles: forment, equivalent to harte, formant an fu joianz ei liez, Erec 372 ; mout, equivalent to ml, une mout bele conjointurej Erec 14 ; tres, OHG drato, ne vuel pas que vos anpreigniez battaille si ires fdenesse, Iwein 3739 ; par, OHG franif qui iant par est hele a mervoille, Erec 535 ; assez (genuoc), assez plus que dit ne vos ai, Iwein 6745. Hartmann does not follow his original so closely as to render these particles directly into their German equivalents. Aside from his free treatment of the material, considerations of rime and metrics would make a literal translation well nigh impossible. 2 For Iwein the figures refer to the divisions in Lachmann's edition. 44 Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German, Harte schiere Iw. 147, Gr. 2330, Parz. 35-6. " s^re Iw. 211, Erst. B. 861, Gr. 236, Kud. 995-3. " spdte Gr. 2812, Kud. 1274-1. " stdrdiche Gr. 3829, starke Gr. 1765, Bit. u. Diet. 9202. « swdre Erst. B. 1415, Mb. 1176-2. « schddeliche Gr. 1278, Bit. u. Diet. 1425. '' unsanfte Erst. B. 298, Kud. 489-4. ^' unsuoze Gr. 3452, Yom jiingst. Ger. Diemer 290-4. " ungeliche Zw. B. 172, Biicher Mosis 68-11. '' veste Iw. 165, Garel 8510. '' vremde Iw. 263, Ex. 120-9. " verre Iw. 46, 221, 223, AH 928, Kud. 702-4. '' vrd Iw. 210, Gr. 2532, 3075, 3326, Nib. 275-2. '' vil Iw. 47, 111, 196, 230, Gr. 2321, 3778, Nib. 353-2. '' vrum Gr. 1886, Kon. Roth. 4148. " wol Iw. 43 etc.. Nib. 772-2. " wis Gr. 491, Hein. u. Kun. 313. '' wilde Iw. 25, Tristan 15969. " zierlich Iw. 30, Nib. 733-4 II. " zornUehe Iw. 172, Nib. 826-4 II. Harte with the followiug wor^s has been found only with Hartmann : karclichen Gr. 2106, muezediehen AH 1220 milte Iw. 261, strenge Gr. 3020, unwiplich Iw. 92, unmugelich AH 189. From the above list it may be seen that nearly every instance of harte in Hartmann can be paralleled from the Austrian popular epic. Certain expressions at this time seem to belong exclusively to the popular diction, harte lutzel^ Use, lobeliohen, rich. Many of the examples from the above list have not been paralleled from Alemannic writers, as harte with : drdte, lise^ lobebaere, riuweo, saiiftej staete, spdte, starJce, schadeliohef zierlich. These facts seem to indicate that Hartmann was influenced in his later works by the Bavarian-Austrian usage as shown in the popular epic and Parzival. It is not necessary to assume that this influence came directly from these popular works, some of them being perhaps later than Hartmann's. The same local usage however that made itself felt in the popular epic evidently had its influence on Hartmann. If this be true, it would be Strengthening Modifiers in Middle High German. 46 natural to suppose that in his earliest work, Erec, written no doubt before his undertaking the crusade, and before he had > //r ^