Nouns, Articles, and Adjectives - EGC
▲
0▲ 0 ▼ 0
Overview of the different forms of nouns and how they interact with the definite article and adjectives
This public article was written by [Deactivated User], and last updated on 20 Oct 2021, 21:02.
[comments] egcsyntaxgenitive casepossession
Like most Germanic languages of the time, Old English nouns were a fair bit more complicated than their Modern English descendants. They came in three genders (masculine, feminine, and neuter), two numbers (singular, plural), and five cases (nominative, accusative, genitive, dative, instrumental). Additionally, nouns of all three genders fell into two main categories: strong and weak nouns, each with a few subcategories. These categories and subcategories determined how the noun would decline, with weak nouns having less variation between genders. This carried over to adjectives, articles, and demonstratives as well, via noun agreement. Paradigms like these were fairly common in older Germanic languages.
Old English noun genders were often not discernible by morphology and had to be memorised. Additionally, sound changes brought in by the Danish Invasion led to a loss in several distinct final vowel endings, which caused many noun endings to become harder to distinguish. This led to increasing confusion over the genders of nouns, as can be seen in writings from the latter years of the Old English period. A final change that would lead to the death of grammatical gender in Einglish was the reduction in forms of the definite article. This change appears to have been common throughout the Germanic languages; though, with significant variation in the degree of this reduction (for comparison, see the following: Dutch, West Frisian, Norwegian, Low German, German). In Modern English, this may have been exacerbated by the Celtic languages, which tend to have only one definite article (albeit with different forms based on whether or not it came before or after a vowel). Whatever the case may be, noun genders and cases mostly died out. The result left Einglish nouns with no grammatical gender and only two cases: direct and genitive. A third oblique case survived for certain articles and demonstratives. This is not to say that Einglish nouns are the same as their Modern English counterparts. The strong/weak paradigm has remained significant and the articles and definite demonstratives have retained some forms that Modern English lost. In this article, we shall explore those differences in depth.
Nouns, called nâmwords or just namen in Einglish, fall into five groups based on their declensions: strong nouns, weak nouns, i-mutation nouns, double-plural nouns, and non-plural nouns. With the exception of that last group, nouns come in singular (oanfold) and plural (mäifold) numbers, with each declining for the direct case (directfall) and genitive case (genitieffall or strünendfall). We will go further in depth on the genitive case at the end of this article.
Strong Nouns | Strong Nâmwords
Strong nouns, called strong nâmwords or strong namen, are nouns that take the ending -(e)s to form the plural. They are the largest category of nouns, especially since most loanwords are adopted as strong nouns. They decline like the following examples:
| badow (battle) | wulf (wolf) | hüðness (opportunity) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DDirect case (case) unmarked case, vs. oblique | GENGenitive (case) possessive | DDirect case (case) unmarked case, vs. oblique | GENGenitive (case) possessive | DDirect case (case) unmarked case, vs. oblique | GENGenitive (case) possessive | |
| SGSingular (number) one countable entity | badow | badows | wulf | wulfs | ||
| PLPlural (number) more than one/few | badows | badowa | wulves | wulva | hüðnesses | hüðnessa |
Note that words that end with a final f tend to take the ending ves, just like Modern English. Also note how words that end in a sibilant (s, sj, scj, z, etc.) don't change to form the singular genitive. Instead, the genitive is implied through context or made through genitive constructions.
Weak Nouns | Wiek Nâmwords
Weak nouns, called wiek nâmwords or wiek namen, are nouns that take the ending -(e)n to form the plural. They are also the only nouns that use that ending to form the singular genitive. In the Caldwell Standard of writing, most weak nouns are marked with a final e, which is silent; however, there are exceptions, such as nouns that end in rgh or some that end in other vowels. They decline like the following examples:
| anlite (face) | toa (toe) | berg (mountain) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DDirect case (case) unmarked case, vs. oblique | GENGenitive (case) possessive | DDirect case (case) unmarked case, vs. oblique | GENGenitive (case) possessive | DDirect case (case) unmarked case, vs. oblique | GENGenitive (case) possessive | |
| SGSingular (number) one countable entity | anlite | anliten | toa | toaen | berg | bergen |
| PLPlural (number) more than one/few | anliten | anlitena | toaen | toaena | bergen | bergena |
I-Mutation Nouns | I-Umlaut Nâmwords
I-mutation nouns, or i-umlaut nouns (i-umlaut nâmwords/namen), are nouns whose core vowel changes to form the direct plural. All other declensions retain the original vowel and decline like strong nouns. Many of the Old English nouns that fell under this category have since shifted to other plurals, but the remainder decline in the following ways:
| mann (human) | foet (foot) | mous (mouse) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DDirect case (case) unmarked case, vs. oblique | GENGenitive (case) possessive | DDirect case (case) unmarked case, vs. oblique | GENGenitive (case) possessive | DDirect case (case) unmarked case, vs. oblique | GENGenitive (case) possessive | |
| SGSingular (number) one countable entity | mann | manns | foet | foets | ||
| PLPlural (number) more than one/few | menn | manna | fiet | foeta | mijs | mousa |
All i-mutation nouns have one of the above core vowels.
Double-Plural Nouns | Stackmäifold Nâmwords
Double plurals, or stackmäifold nâmwords/namen (lit. stack-plural nouns), are nouns that take the plural ending -ren. This noun category is more common than Modern English. Most of the nouns that became double-plurals took the Old English plural ending -ra/ru, a plural form that died out in Middeleinglisç; however, some originally ended with -ra/re/ru in the nominative singular form. A large number of them are also kinship terms (i.e cüld, moðer, broðer, faðer). They decline like the following examples:
| cüld (child) | fiðer (square) | wonder (wonder) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DDirect case (case) unmarked case, vs. oblique | GENGenitive (case) possessive | DDirect case (case) unmarked case, vs. oblique | GENGenitive (case) possessive | DDirect case (case) unmarked case, vs. oblique | GENGenitive (case) possessive | |
| SGSingular (number) one countable entity | cüld | cülds | fiðer | fiðers | wonder | wonders |
| PLPlural (number) more than one/few | cildren | cildrena | fiðren | fiðrena | wondren | wondrena |
Non-Plural Nouns | Mäifoldless Nâmwords
Non-plural nouns, or mäifoldless nâmwords/namen, are nouns that do not have a separate direct plural form. The term mäifoldless (plural-less) should not be confused with untellendlig (uncountable). While many non-plural nouns are uncountable, many of them aren't. The big difference is that uncountable nouns require a measure word (metword) when being paired with numbers. For example, oan rijs (one rice) is usually ungrammatical because rijs is uncountable, while oan corn of rijs or oan rijscorn (both meaning one grain of rice) are both grammatical. In contrast, it's perfectly grammatical to say ðrij deur (three animals), because deur is countable (tellendlig). Also note that uncountable nouns may have countable forms with different meanings, just like in Modern English. While oan rijs is usually ungrammatical, it can be grammatical if talking about a variety/strain of rice; however, some Leidsmoet members hold that forms like rijsstründ or rijssort are more proper. One final thing of note is that while all non-plural nouns have a theoretical plural genitive, only countable nouns actually use it. With all that in mind, non-plural nouns decline in the following ways:
| edsijt (respect) | deur (animal) | brass (brass) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DDirect case (case) unmarked case, vs. oblique | GENGenitive (case) possessive | DDirect case (case) unmarked case, vs. oblique | GENGenitive (case) possessive | DDirect case (case) unmarked case, vs. oblique | GENGenitive (case) possessive | |
| SGSingular (number) one countable entity | edsijt | edsijts | deur | deurs | ||
| PLPlural (number) more than one/few | edsijt | edsijta | deur | deura | brass | brassa |
Notes On Pronunciation
The final letter a is usually pronounced as a schwa in Einglish. However, the exact pronunciation of it depends on the stress patterns of the preceding syllable(s) and can be a bit tricky to represent in IPA. Imagine a gradient with the sound /ə/ on one end and the sound /ɐ/ on the other (specifically the pronunciation heard in the audio sample of the linked Wikipedia page). If the preceding syllable is stressed, the final a is pronounced more on the /ə/ side of the scale. If the preceding syllable is unstressed, the a is more on the /ɐ/ side. Of course, the exact pronunciation also varies by dialect. To make things simple, I will usually write this sound as /ɐ/ in IPA.
Some plural forms, particular double-plurals, may affect the length of preceding vowel due to sound changes like pre-cluster shortening and homorganic lengthening (which caused u-mutation in Middeleinglisç, albeit with some irregularity). For words like cüld/cildren, this length difference is marked visually, but this is not always the case. Another change brought on by double-plurals is the pronunciation of ð. Many speakers pronounce the digraph ðr more like [d̪ɾ] (usually dental), or as the unvoiced [θɾ̥] (dialectal), when at the middle of words before an unstressed vowel. To illustrate:
- fiðer
[fiðɛɜ̯] fiðren
[fɪd̪ɾɛn] - moðers
[moðɛɜ̯z] moðrena
[mɔd̪ɾɛnɐ]
Like Modern English, Einglish has two articles (or liðwords): definite and indefinite (gemarkt ond ungemarkt). These articles, alongside the definite demonstratives (see below), are one of the few parts of speech that retained the oblique case (obliekfall). The oblique case formed from a merger of the dative and instrumental cases and is used to mark indirect objects. This includes the secondary objects of ditransitive verbs. These declensions are:
| DDirect case (case) unmarked case, vs. oblique | OBOblique (case) marked case, vs. direct | GENGenitive (case) possessive | |
|---|---|---|---|
| DEFDefinite "the".SGSingular (number) one countable entity | |||
| DEFDefinite "the".PLPlural (number) more than one/few | |||
| INDEFIndefinite a nonspecific referent |
The final n of the direct & oblique indefinite articles is often not pronounced before a consonant. This pattern holds true for many common words that end with n. The oblique form originated from OE anum, which shifted to anem then âm during the Middeleinglisç period. The genitive form originated from OE anes, the es weakening to a schwa sound (represented by a) and the long a shifting to oa during the vowel shift.
The forms of the definite article come from Late OE þe, with influence from Old Norse. The direct case þe merged with the plural form þa in Early Middeleinglisç. The singular oblique form (ðan) comes from a merger of OE þam (dative masculine, neuter, and plural) and þon (instrumental masculine and neuter). The plural oblique form comes directly from þam, but the pronunciation has been influenced by ðem, its Old Norse cognate (hence ä and not â).
Here are a few examples of these articles at work:
- Ij jôd to ðan sçoppe ðas freunds ðijn = I went to the shop of that friend of yours
- Ðäm qvennen gav ðe cüld ðe bloemen for ðan wier = To the women, the child gave the flowers for the man
- Oana trews blossems in âm crôg = A tree's blossoms in a jar
In the second example, the secondary object (qvennen) of the verb gav is marked by ðäm without the use of the preposition to. This is because ðäm already marks that the women are the recipients of the giving. This type of preposition dropping is only used in the dative case for ditransitive verbs. The same cannot be done for the first sentence because to ðan sçoppe marks the direction of the action, not a recipient. That being said, it's rare for native speakers to use the word order seen in the second sentence, since it can still cause confusion if ðäm is misheard.
Definite Demonstratives: This, These, That, Those | Gemarkt Onwijsends: Ðes, Ðies, Ðat, Ðôs
Four words that should be mentioned alongside the definite article are the four definite demonstratives (gemarkt onwijsends) this, these, that, and those. These words are directly related to the definite article and all also have oblique and genitive forms:
| PROXProximal (proximity) close to speaker | DISTDistal (proximity) far from speaker (and addressee) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SGSingular (number) one countable entity | PLPlural (number) more than one/few | SGSingular (number) one countable entity | PLPlural (number) more than one/few | |
| DDirect case (case) unmarked case, vs. oblique | ðes | ðies | ðat | ðôs |
| OBOblique (case) marked case, vs. direct | ðüs | ðiesen | ðan | ðäm |
| GENGenitive (case) possessive | ðissa | ðiera | ðas | ðara |
As can be seen from the above two tables, the genitive forms for the definite article and the distal demonstratives are the same. This is because the Old English definite articles descended from and were used as distal demonstratives. In other words, Einglish speakers do not differentiate between the phrases of the and of that. For the proximal demonstratives, the singular genitive descended from OE þisse(s) while the plural came from an altered form of either ON þeirra (originally equivalent to the above ðara) or OE þæra (source of ðara), with the vowel changed to match that of ðies.
Note: while the Modern English term definite demonstratives can include such and same, these are not included in the Einglish term gemarkt onwijsends. This is because the Einglish equivalents of those two terms (suç and sâm) do not have genitive forms and, as such, should be excluded.
In Old English, adjectives would decline for all the different cases of the noun they modify. By the Late Middeleinglisç period, this had been reduced to just a singular-plural distinction, the plural form being marked by a final -e. When most e's became silent at the end of words during Late Middeleinglisç, this distinction was lost. This is all to say that Einglish adjectives, or ükendliwords, only have one form, just like in Modern English. So, ükendlig (meaning augmentative or adjectival) will always take the form ükendlig, regardless of the form of the following noun. This also holds true for adverbs, or bijwords, and most determiners, determinants (except the aforementioned demonstratives).
The genitive case is one of only two surviving cases in Einglish, just like many modern Germanic languages, and it's used quite frequently. But, it should be noted that this case has undergone a significant decline since Old English. Not to the same extent as Modern English, but still quite significant. Whereas virtually all parts of speech (excluding verbs) declined for different cases in Old English, the genitive only survived in nouns, pronouns, the definite and indefinite articles, and the definite demonstratives (excluding suç and sâm, which are not classified as such in Einglish). These are utilised in a few ways:
Construction 1: Simple Possession | Oanfold Besitting
The most basic genitive construction is formed by placing the owner (in the genitive case) before the possession. If the owner is marked by a definite article or definite demonstrative, the article/determiner also takes the genitive case. So:
- Jons heäd = Jon's head (Note that no apostrophe is used in the Einglish form)
- Ðas hounds ball = The dog's ball
- Ðiera manna hoams = These people's homes
This type of construction is used when referring to a specific referent and not something in general. For a more general possessor (as in phrases/sentences like they look like dog's eyes), compounding is usually employed.
Construction 2: Compounding | Sâmstelling
More so than Modern English, Einglish makes extensive use of compound words. The difference between the two in this regard is best highlighted by genitive compounding. Essentially, whenever a general possessor is used rather than a specific one, Einglish prefixes the possessor onto the possession. So:
- Houndseajen = Dog's eyes
- Neadelseaje = Eye of a needle
- Cattsspoer = Cat's paw
These can also be used definitely; however, they are treated as compound nouns in that case and not as genitives (ðôs houndseajen, ðat neadelseajen, ðe cattsspoer). This is the most common way that compound nouns are formed in Einglish, with the first noun in the genitive case rather than having both nouns in the direct case. As mentioned earlier, these compounds are not used in drawing focus on a specific noun. In other words, you would use cattsspoer when focusing on the paw itself, not on the cat who owns it. If the cat who owns the paw is important, you should use other constructions like ðas catts spoer or ðe spoer ðas catts. On top of this, ðe cattsspoer tends to carry the connotation that the paw is no longer connected to the cat.
If this sounds confusing, we'll do a recap at the end to compare the different constructions.
Construction 3: Possessor Final Order | Besitter-Endlig Fading
In many cases, the possessor may be placed after the possession. This usually puts more emphasis on the possession and less on the possessor. It's primarily used when the possessor is definite, but it may also be used with an indefinite possessor. Like the previous cases, the possessor and its article/demonstrative take the genitive case. So:
- Ðe moðer ðas cülds = The mother of the/that child
- Ðe folk oana burgen = The folk/people of a city
- Ðies toaen ðiera foeta = These toes of these feet
In songs and poems, the order may be reversed (i.e ðas cülds ðe moðer). Though, this can come off as awkward or confusing.
A similar construction may also be used if the possession is marked by a different determiner, or a pronoun is used instead:
- Oan ðara cildrena = One of the children (Note that the genitive form cildrena is still used)
- Suç folk ðissa burgen = Such folk of this city
- Eaç toa ðiera foeta = Each toe of these feet
- An hound ðas wiers = A dog of the/that man
The same cannot be said for when the possessor takes a different determiner or the indefinite article. For the latter, the second construction (compounding) is used. For the former, the word of is used.
This order may also be used for proper names, if an article or determiner is placed before the possession. This is used in free variation with simple possession and of posession; however, it's most common when specifying a possessor of a possessor (i.e a friend of a friend of Tony). So:
- Ðat süster Annas = That sister of Anna
- Oan ðara manna Eriks = One of those men (people) of Erik
- An toeð Marks = A tooth of Mark
The second example represents the most common use of this word order, but the other two are still grammatically correct.
Finally, the genitive-predicative forms of personal pronouns may also be used like above. This is a bit more common than with proper names, especially when emphasising the possession:
- Ðat süster his = That sister of his
- Oan ðara manna ours = One of those men of ours
- An toeð ðijn = A tooth of yours
Construction 4: 'Of' Possession | 'Of' Besitting
Similar to Modern English, Einglish does use the word of to mark possession; though, not quite as frequently. Of is primarily used in cases where the possessor is not marked with an article or to mark place of origin. The latter applies even if the place starts with ðe (in the oblique case). So:
- Ðe faðer of suç cildren = The father of such children
- An mann of all folk = A man (human) of all people
- Ðe wier of Medan = The man of Medan
- Geurs of ðan Djungel = George of the Jungle (Geurs is one of several Einglish versions of George)
Unlike in Modern English, Einglish requires phrases like one of to be directly followed by the group it refers to. This means that phrases like one of Elsa's fingers are considered improper. Instead, Einglish opts for phrases like oan ðara fingera Elsas or oan ðara fingera of Elsa.
Recap
To recap, let's go through each construction with a similar example: the possessor being neadel (needle) and possession being eaje (eye).
- Ðas neadels eaje = The/that needle's eye. Refers to the eye of a specific needle, with focus on the needle.
- Ðe neadelseaje = The eye of a needle. Here, the word neadel mainly serves to specify what type of eye is being referred to. Which needle it belongs to is unimportant.
- Ðe eaje ðas neadels = The eye of the needle. Here, both the needle and the eye are given focus. This is construction is a bit more common for cases in which the possessor is an inanimate object.
- Ðe eaje of ðan Neadel = The eye of the Needle. This construction would only be used for ðe neadel if it were referring to a place called the Neadel.
✎ Edit Article ✖ Delete Article
Comments
