Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

OE Conjunction þeah (þe): Law II Cnut 72.1 and II Cnut 75

  • Published:
Neophilologus Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Old English þeah (þe) is well attested as a concessive conditional and concessive connective. Two occurrences in the Anglo-Saxon law-codes, however, not only fulfill all the logical criteria of a conditional marker but also clearly parallel the if-then strategy characteristics of pre-Conquest legislation. It is suggested that OE þeah (þe) represents a stage of polysemy in the process of semantic change from conditional to concessive conditional and concessive meaning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bately, J. ed. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: MS. A. D. Dumville and S. Keynes, general editors (1983-), The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: A multi-volume collaborative edition. Cambridge: Brewer, 1986.

  • Bosworth, J. and T. N. Toller. An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary. (1921) Supplement by T. N. Toller. (1972) Enlarged Addenda and Corrigenda by A. Campbell. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1898.

  • Burnham, J. M. Concessive Constructions in Old English Prose. Yale Studies in English 39. New York: Holt, 1911.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A. “Review of The Concessive Relation in Old English Poetry. By Randolph Quirk. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1954.” Review of English Studies 7 (1956): 64–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, L. Historical Linguistics: An Introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark Hall, J. R. A Concise Anglo-Saxon Dictionary, 4th edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1960.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collinson, W. E. “Tradition and Divergence in the Syntax of Some Western Languages.” Transactions of the Philological Society 57 (1959): 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • König, E. “On the History of Concessive Connectives in English: Diachronic and Synchronic Evidence.” Lingua 66 (1985): 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levinson, S. C. Pragmatics (Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liebermann, F. ed. Quadripartitus: Ein englisches Rechtsbuch von 1114. Halle: Max Niemeyer, 1892.

  • Liebermann, F. ed. and trans. Die Gesetze der Angelsachsen, 3 vols. Halle: Max Niemeyer, 1898-1916.

  • Liggins, E. M. “Expressions of Causal Relationships in Old English Prose.” Unpublished doctoral dissertation: University of London, 1955.

  • Liggins, E. M. “The Authorship of the Old English Orosius.” Anglia 88 (1970): 289–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, J. C. Old English Syntax: A Handbook. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, B. Old English Syntax, 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  • OED = Simpson, J. A. and E. S. C. Weiner. The Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd edition, 20 vols. Also 1992 CD-ROM version. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quirk, R. The Concessive Relation in Old English Poetry. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1954.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. and C. Kay, with L. Grundy. A Thesaurus of Old English, 2 vols. (King's College London Medieval Studies 11). London: Centre for Late Antique and Medieval Studies, King's College London, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwyter, J. R. Old English Legal Language: The Lexical Field of Theft (NOWELE Supplement 15). Odense: Odense University Press, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwyter, J. R. “Syntax and Style in the Anglo-Saxon Law-Codes,” in C. Ehler and U. Schaefer, Eds. Verschriftung - Verschriftlichung: Aspekte des Medienwechsels in verschiedenen Kulturen und Epochen (ScriptOralia 94). Tübingen: Gunter Narr, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  • Traugott, E. C. “Syntax,” in R. M. Hogg, Ed. The Cambridge History of the English Language, Volume I: The Beginnings to 1066. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992, pp. 168–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Visser, F. Th. An Historical Syntax of the English Language, 4 vols. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1963-1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitelock, D. “Wulfstan and the Laws of Cnut.” English Historical Review 63 (1948): 433–452.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitelock, D. trans. English Historical Documents c. 500-1042, 2nd edition. London: Eyre Methuen, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wormald, P. “Quadripartitus,” in G. Garnett and J. Hudson, Eds. Law and Government in Medieval England and Normandy: Essays in Honour of Sir James Holt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994, pp. 111–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wormald, P. The Making of English Law. Volume I: Legislation and its Limits. Oxford: Blackwell, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Englishes Seminar I, Universität Freiburg, D-79085, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany

    Jürg Rainer Schwyter

Authors
  1. Jürg Rainer Schwyter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schwyter, J.R. OE Conjunction þeah (þe): Law II Cnut 72.1 and II Cnut 75. Neophilologus 85, 291–296 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004871208897

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1004871208897

Keywords

Search

Navigation