Microsoft Word - 2020article_2_Ogura.docx Michiko Ogura, Selim25 (2020): 21–36. ISSN 1132-631X / DOI: https://doi.org/10.17811/selim.25.2020.21-36 He forbead þæt hi ne weopon: A negative element in the þæt-clause introduced by a verb of prohibition Michiko Ogura Tokyo Woman’s Christian University In ICEHL 20 at the University of Edinburgh,1 I made a report of my research on this theme. The present paper gives additional facts on the construction of a verb of negation followed by a þæt-clause with a negative element. What I try to exemplify is not a historical change from expletive negative to affirmative clause, but the facts that (i) the expletive negative was one of the correlative constructions based on Old English syntax and (ii) the affirmative clause was already found in early Old English together with the negative clause, even though the negative clause was frequent in late Old English to early Middle English and then decreased after late Middle English. The verb with negative import with a negated þæt-clause is, therefore, not an illogical expression but a stylistic device of combining the negation of the governing verb with the content of the governed, negated þæt-clause.2 Keywords: correlative expressions; early Middle English; forbeodan; Old English; verbs of negative import 1 The 20th International Conference of English Historical Linguistics held at Edinburgh, August 2018. This paper is a revised version read at the Medieval Symposium at the International Association of University Professors of English (IAUPE) Conference held in 2019. 2 Among previous studies, Ishiguro (1998) and van der Wurff (1999) use Dictionary of Old English (DOE) data, but Iyeiri (2010) starts from Middle English. Wallage (2017) seems more diachronic. 22 Michiko Ogura 1. Old English forbeodan > Middle English forbeden Table 1 shows the syntactic patterns of Old English forbeodan ‘to forbid’. In the whole 327 examples, the proportion of the expletive negative construction is 14.7 per cent, which seems not so large. When the examples are restricted to those with a þæt-clause, however, the ratio of expletive negative goes up to 73.8 per cent. This is the reason why the Old English period is regarded as that of the expletive negative and criticised as ungrammatical by modern linguists. Let us start looking at the examples as dialectically as possible. The first three examples below are quoted from Cura Pastoralis (MS Hatton 20, dated 890–897, that is, the earliest examples).3 As Visser (1963–1973) had already stated, the þæt-clause introduced by forbeodan could take either negative or affirmative. The expletive negative is not at all idiomatic in Cura Pastoralis; the proportion of affirmative versus negative is five to two. (1) CP 32.213.24 ða spræc he suelce he hit ðagiet nyste ðæt hie hit him ða io ondredon, ac forbead him ðæt hit ne scolde sua weorðan, ‘when he spoke as if he did not yet know that they had been afraid of it, but forbade them that it must be in such a way’ (2) CP 59.451.5 Ac ðær ðær us God forbead ðæt we ure ryhtwisnesse beforan monnum dyden, he us gecyðde forhwy hit forbead, ða he cwæð, ðylæs hi eow herigen. ‘But when God forbade us that we should perform our righteousness before men, he showed us why he forbade it, when he said, “lest they praise you”.’ (3) CP 11.73.15 Sua hwelc ðonne sua ðissa uncysta hwelcre underðieded bið, him bið forboden ðæt he offrige [Gode] hlafe, ‘whomsoever, then, is subject to one of those vices, is forbidden that he should offer bread to God’ 3 Data on manuscripts are based on Ker (1957/1990). He forbead þæt hi ne weopon 23 Table 1. Old English forbeodan and its syntactic patterns V + obj. 105 V + Ø 80 V + þæt + ne 48 V + to-inf. 21 V + þæt 17 V + inf. 5 V + d.s. 4 V + obj. + þæt + ne 1 V + ד þus cwæð + d.s. + ne 2 V + þus cweðende + d.s. + ne 2 V + cweðende + d.s. 2 V + ד cwæð + d.s. 2 V + ד þus cwæð + d.s. 1 V + ד cwæð + þæt 1 V + ד sægde + þæt + ne 1 V + ד segð + þæt + ne 1 V + ד sæde + d.s. 1 V + d.s. + ne 1 ne/na + V 30 ne + V + þæt + ne 2 Total 327 Example (4) below is from interlinear glosses of the Psalter. The Lambeth Psalter (PsGlI, Lambeth Palace 427, dated in the first half of the eleventh century) has a triple gloss of the verb of negative import and the expletive negative. When the Vespasian Psalter (PsGlA, Cotton Vespasian A. i, ninth century) and the Stowe Psalter (PsGlF, Stowe 2, later than the Lambeth Psalter) are compared, bewerian, a synonym of forbeodan, is not followed by a þæt-clause but by ðy læs in Vespasian, the earliest, Mercian gloss, while late West Saxon Stowe Psalter has a þæt-clause with negation. (For the examples of the Psalter and the Gospels, I include the Wycliffite (WyEV, WyLV) and Authorized versions (AV) to show the historical change in syntax and renderings.) 24 Michiko Ogura (4) PsGlI 33.14 [Prohibe linguam tuam a malo et labia tua ne loquantur dolum] forbeod l. forhafa l. bewere tungan þine fram yfle weleras þine þæt hig ne sprecon faken cf. PsGlA: bewere tungan ðine from yfle weolure ðy læs sprecen facen cf. PsGlF: bewere tungan ðine fram yfele ד welerum ðinum þæt ne sprecon facen WycEV: Forfende thi tunge fro euel; and thi lippis that thei speke not treccherie. WycLV: Forbede thi tunge fro yuel; and thi lippis speke not gile. AV: Keepe thy tongue from euill, and thy lippes from speaking guile. Examples (5) and (6) are from the Gospels. In (5), Lindisfarne (Li, Cotton Nero D. iv, latter half of the tenth century) and Rushworth (Ru, Auct.2.19, tenth century) use bebeodan, while West Saxon Corpus Christi (WSCp, CCCC140, eleventh to twelfth century) chooses forbeodan; the expletive negative appears, therefore, in the West Saxon version. In (6), Li uses the double gloss of forbeodan and werian with another double gloss of to-infinitive and þæt-clause, Ru2 uses forbeodan with to-infinitive (or rather, follows the first gloss of Li), and WSCp chooses forbeodan with the expletive negative. These examples of the Psalter and of the Gospels show that the late West Saxon texts tend to use the expletive negative construction. (5) Mk 3.12 [et uehementer cominabatur eis né manifestarent illum] Li: ד swiðe bebead him ꝥte hia ne æwades ł mersades hine Ru1: ד swiðe bibead him ꝥ hiæ ne eowde him WSCp: ד he him swyðe forbead. ꝥ hi hine ne ge-swutelodon. WycEV: And gretely he manasside hem, that thei shulden nat make hym opyn, or knowen. AV: And he straitly charged them, that they should not make him knowen. (6) Lk 23.2 [hunc inuenimus sub-uertentem gentem nostram et prohibentem tributa dari caesari et dicentem sé christum regem esse] Li: ðiosne woe gemitten under-cerrende ł cynn userne ד forbeadende ł woerdende gæfelo ł to seallanne ł ꝥte se gesald ðæm caseri ד cuoeðende hine cristum cyning ꝥte woere ł ꝥte sé Ru2: ðiosne we gemitton under-cerrende cynn usera ד forbeodende ææ ד wigga [sic] ד for-beodende gæfel to sellanna ðæm casera ד cweðende hine crist cynig ꝥte were He forbead þæt hi ne weopon 25 WSCp: Ðisne we gemétton for-hwyrfende ure þeode. ד for-beodende ꝥ man þam casere gafol ne sealde. ד segð ꝥ he sí crist cyning; WycEV: We han founden this man turnynge vpsodoun oure folk, and forbedinge tributis to be ȝouun to Cesar, and seyinge him silf to be Crist king. AV: We found this fellow peruerting the nation, and forbidding to giue tribute to Cesar, saying, that he himselfe is Christ a king. Examples (7) and (8) are from Orosius (Or, Additional 47967, first half of the tenth century), (7) with a negative (expletive) clause and (8) with an affirmative þæt-clause. (7) Or 6 11.140.11 he forbead ofer ealne his onwald þæt mon nanum cristenum men ne abulge, ‘he forbade over all his dominion that any Christian men should be offended’ (8) Or 6 1.133.31 þæt wæs þæt he fleah ד forbead þæt hiene mon god hete, swa nan cyning nolde þe ær him wæs, ‘that was, that he declined and forbade that one should call him god, as no king who had been before him wanted’ Example (9) is from Bede (Tanner 10, first half of the tenth century), which has a repetitive word pair of bewereð and forbeodeð (for ‘prohibit’) with an infinitive (following Latin). In the first half of the tenth century, therefore, it can be said that the construction ‘a verb with negative import + þæt-clause with a negative element’ is not yet idiomatic. (9) Bede 1 16.70.6 [et sacra lex prohibet cognationis turpitudinem reuelare] ond seo halige ǽ bewereð ד forbeodeð þa scondlicnesse onwreon mægsibba ‘and the holy law prohibits and forbids to uncover the shame of relatives’ From example (10) we see the choice in the works of Ælfric and late West Saxon. Example (10) is from Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies (ÆCHom, Cambridge University Library Gg.3.28, tenth to eleventh century), which has the expletive negative construction. Example (11) from the same manuscript shows forbeodan + þus cweðende + direct speech containing a negative element; this is one of the 26 Michiko Ogura stylistic devices using a verb of saying (cf. Ogura 1988) with direct or indirect speech of negation, as seen in Table 1 above. Example (12) is from Ælfric’s Lives of Saints, St Swithun (Cotton Julius E. vii, eleventh century) and (13) from Ælfric’s First Old English Letter to Wulfstan (CCCC190, first half of the eleventh century), both of which illustrate the expletive negative. (10) ÆCHom II, 43 322.115 Se ælmihtiga god forbead þurh his witegan þæt nán ðæra manna þe rihtwis beon wile. ne sceal syllan his feoh to gafole; ‘The Almighty God forbade through his wise man that anyone of those men who wish to be righteous must give his money as tribute’ (11) ÆCHom 21 206 ac Moyses him forbead micclum þus cweðende: Ne fare ge, ic eow bidde, swa fuse to þam lande ‘but Moses forbade them severely saying thus, “Do not go, I command you, so eagerly to the land”’ (12) ÆLS (Swithun) 410 and god sylf forbead þæt we swefnum ne folgion. þe læs ðe se deofol us bedydrian mæge. ‘and God himself forbade that we should follow vision, lest the devil could deceive us’ (13) ÆLet 2 (Wulfstan 1) 10 and Moyses hy awrat and mancynne forbead, þæt hi nænne hæþenscype habban ne mostan ‘and Moses wrote them and forbade to mankind that they should have any paganism’ Example (14) is from Alexander’s Letter to Aristotle (Cotton Vitellius A. xv, tenth to eleventh century) and (15) from Genesis in the Heptateuch (Cotton Claudius B. iv, first half of the eleventh century), both of which show the expletive negative. In example (16), First Sunday in Lent (CCCC198, eleventh century), forbeodan is negated, and so is the content of the following þæt-clause, which means that ne in the þæt-clause is redundant. Examples (17) Sermo bone paredicatio (CCCC201), (18) Prudentius Psychomachia Titles (CCCC23), and (19) Poenitentiale pseudo-Egberti (Laud Misc. 482) all illustrate the expletive negative. He forbead þæt hi ne weopon 27 (14) Alex 40.13 Ac þa forbead hit se bisceop þæt hi ne weopon. ‘But then the bishop forbade it that they should weep’ (15) Gen 3.1 [Cur præcepit uobis Deus, ut non comederetis de omni ligno Paradisi?] Hwi forbead God eow ðæt ge ne æton of ælcon treowe binnan Paradisum? WycEV: Whi comaundide God to ȝow, that ȝe shulden not ete of ech tree of paradis? AV: Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of euery tree of the garden? (16) HomS 16(Ass 12) 81 Men ða leofestan, we mynegiað eac ælcne getreowfulne man, þæt he gelomlice lufige cumliðnysse and nanum cuman ne forbeode, þæt he ne mote on his huse gerestan, ‘Beloved men, we remember each faithful man, that he should frequently love hospitality, and forbid no guests that he should be allowed to rest in his house’ (17) HomU 47 (Nap 58) 103 hit is forboden on halgum bocum swyþe deope, þæt nan cristen man ne mote his ælmessan ahwæþer behatan oððe to bringan ne his wæccan ne his broces bote secean ahwider, buton to Criste sylfum and to his halgum and to cyrcean. ‘It is forbidden in holy books very deeply that any Christian is allowed either to promise the alms or to bring wakefulness or to seek remedy for his misery, except for Christ himself and for his saints and for church.’ (18) Conf 3.1.1 (RaithY) 146 Ælcum geleaffullum men is forboden, þæt he his feoh ne his æhta to nanum unrihtum gafol ne læne, ‘It is forbidden for each faithful man that he should give his cattle or his goods as any false debt’ (19) PrudT 1 1 Her godes swyðra forbead Abrahame, þæt he his sunu ne ofsloge, ‘Here God’s power forbade Abraham that he should kill his son’ 28 Michiko Ogura Peterborough Chronicle (Laud Misc. 636, dated a. 1121) shows the expletive negative in examples (20), (21), and (22), and this construction keeps appearing in the texts of the transitional period like Bodley 343 Homilies (c. 1175), as in examples (23) and (24). (20) ChronE 656.91 ic forbede þet ne kyning ne nan man ne haue nan onsting buton þon ד abbot ane, ‘and I forbid that either a king or any man should have any authority except the abbot alone’ (21) ChronE 675.31 (MED forbēden (v.) 1a (a)) Alswa ic beode þe Saxulf biscop þet swa swa þu hit geornest þet seo mynstre beo freo, swa ic forbeode þe ד ealle þe biscopas þe æfter ðe cumon of Criste ד of ealle his halgan þet ge nan onsting ne hauen of þet mynstre buton swa micel swa þone abbot wile. ‘Likewise I command you, bishop Seaxwulf, that just as you wish the monastery to be free, so I forbid you and all those bishops that succeed you, by Christ and by all his saints, to have any authority over the monastery except in so far as the abbot shall permit’ (tr. Garmonsway) (22) ChronE 1012.5 (= ChronF 1012.4, ChronC 1012.6, ChronD 1012.6) forþan þe he nolde heom nan feoh behaten ד forbead þet man nan þing wið him syllan ne moste ‘because he did not wish to promise them any money and forbade that anything should be given for him’ (23) LS 5 (InventCrossNap) 101 (= HRood (Bod343) 8.12) þonne wolde ic ðe sceawian gyt sum ðare ðingæ ðe he me swiðlice forbead ꝥ ic ðe sceawian ne sceolde ‘then I would like to show you something which he strongly forbade me that I must show you’ (24) BodHom 122.2 (MED) For hwón forbeat Crist his þeiȝnum ꝥ heo ne sceolden cuþæn ne sæcgæn náne men ꝥ brihtlice sihðe, buton for twam þingum? ‘Why did Christ forbid his disciples to make known or tell anyone of that bright vision except for two reasons?’ He forbead þæt hi ne weopon 29 This construction is still found in Ormulum (a. 1200, Orm) as in (25), and more examples in Laȝamon’s Brut (c. 1275, Laȝ), as in (26) to (30), all in expletive negative, except (28). (25) Orm 9833 (MED) ,all forrþi forrbæd Johan ד Þatt teȝȝ ne sholldenn ȝellpenn Þurrh modiȝnesse off þeȝȝre kinn, ‘and therefore John forbade all, that they should yelp through the pride of their people’ (26) Laȝ (C) 781 & ich for-beode [O: …beode]        heolde mine þeinē. vppe þere muchele lufe        þe us bi-tueiȝen lið. þat nan ne beo so wilde        nan swa unwitti. ‘and I forbade my faithful thanes, by the great love that lies between us, that none should be so wild, none so void of wit’ (27) Laȝ 13180 C: Vortiger þe hæȝ        for-bad his hired-monnen. þet heo nane manne ne tælden whæt heo hæfden on anwolde. O: Vortiger anon rihtes         for-bead alle his cnihtes. þat non of ȝam ne tolde         wat he hadde on anwolde. ‘Vortiger the high (immediately) forbade his followers (knights) that they should tell anyone (of them) what they (he) had in power’ (28) Laȝ 20579 C: & Arður for-bæd his cnihtes         dæies & nihtes. þat heo liðen stille         swulc heo stelen woldē. O: Arthur for-bed his cnihtes         daiȝes and nihtes. þat hii ȝeoden ase stille         so hii stele wolde. ‘Arthur forbade his knights, by day and night, that they should proceed still, as if they would steal’ (29) Laȝ 25799 C: þenne for-beode ich þe         bi þine bare life. þat þu nauere wið þene scucke         feht no biginne. O: þanne for-bed ich þe         bi þine bare liue. þat þou neuere wiþ þan         fiht ne bi-gynne. ‘then I forbid thee, by thy bare life, that thou shouldest ever begin fight with the monster’ 30 Michiko Ogura (30) Laȝ 26013 C: for-bad heom bi heore leomen         & bi heore bare liuen. þat nan neoren swa kene         þat heom neh comen. buten he iseȝen         þat hit ned weoren. O: for-bed ȝam bi hire leomes         and hire bare lifue. þat non neore so kene         þat heom neh come. b..e hii ..eȝen         þat hit neod weore. ‘(Arthur) forbade them, by their limbs and their bare lives, that anyone who were so keen should come near, unless they saw that it were need’ From the Middle English Dictionary, I add examples (31) from Ayenbit of Inwit (1340), and (32) from Chaucer’s Tale of Melibee (c. 1390). (31) Ayenb 10.6 (MED) Ine þise heste ous ys uorbode þet we ne lyeȝe ne ous uorzuerie; ‘In this behest it is forbidden for us to lie or forswear (lit. that we should neither lie nor forswear)’ (32) Chaucer CT.B.Mel. 2770–2775 (MED) This is to seyn, that nature deffendeth and forbedeth by right that no man make hymself riche unto the harm of another persone. 2. Other verbs and verb phrases of negative import Most verbs of negative import have the same feature of showing the expletive negative construction. Examples (33) and (34) are those of oðsacan and ætsacan. As seen in manuscript variants, ansacan, ætsacan, ondsacan, oðsacan, and wiðsacan share this feature. In example (35), in addition to the different choice of prefixes to the verb, the use of þæt as an indicator of both direct and indirect speech is illustrated. Li and Ru1 have þæt + direct speech, while WSCp has an indirect speech after þæt, with the expletive negative. Example (36) has two examples of wiðsacan, one with a þæt-clause with a negative element and the other ne + wiðsacan with a þæt-clause with a negative element; both illustrate the expletive negative. He forbead þæt hi ne weopon 31 (33) Or 6 4.136.28 Oðsace [C: ætsace] nu, cwæð Orosius, se se þe wille oþþe se þe dyrre, þæt þæt angin nære gestilled for þæs cristendomes Gode, ‘Deny now, said Orosius, he who wish or dare, that the beginning were stable before the Christian God’ (34) Laȝ (C) 6100 bute þat þa Densce men         dunriht at-soken [O: asoken]. þet heo to Brut-londe         nolden moren senden. gold ne garsume         ne gauel of þon lōde. ‘except that the Danish men denied downright, that they would send anymore gold or treasure or tribute of the land’ (35) Mt 26.72 [et iterum negauit cum iuramento quia non noui hominem] Li: ד eft-sona onsóc mid aað ꝥ ic ne conn ðone monno Ru1: ד æft דsoc mid haþe ꝥ ic ne conn þone monn WSCp: ד he wiðsóc eft mid áþe ꝥ he hys nan þing ne cuðe WycEV: And eftsone he denyede with an ooth, for he knewe nat the man. WycLV: And eftsoone he denyede with an ooth, For I knewe not the man. AV: And againe hee denied with an oath, I doe not know the man. (36) ÆCHom II,13 130.101 Þa wiðsóc crist swiðe rihtlice. þæt he deofol on him næfde. ac he ne wiðsoc þæt he nære samaritanisc. ‘Then Christ denied very rightly that he had a devil in him, but he did not deny that he was a Samaritan’ Examples of forsacan are given from (37) to (40). Example (37), from Cura Pastoralis, has an affirmative þæt-clause. Examples (38) and (39) are from Gregory’s Dialogues (CCCC178 first half of the eleventh century); (38) has a manuscript variant of wiðsacan and the following þæt-clause is in the affirmative; (39) is the only example of the expletive negative among the four examples of the verb in this text. Example (40), though from Ælfric, has the þæt-clause in the affirmative. (37) CP 36.247.19 he forsæcð ðæt he him to cume ד ‘and he refuses that he should come to him (= Wisdom)’ 32 Michiko Ogura (38) GD1 (C) 10.82.2 he ȝelædde þa cnihtas toforan him, þe he eallinȝa ær forsoc [H: wiðsoc], þæt he hi æfre aȝyfan wolde ‘he led the servants before him, whom he had entirely refused that he ever wanted to give it’ (39) GDPref and 3(C) 37.255.17 Ac se drihtnes wer forsoc, þæt he swylcum lace onfon nolde, ‘But the man of the Lord refused, that he would receive such offering’ (40) ÆCHom II,1 9.227 gif hwá hit forsoce þæt he sceolde beon forbærned on hatum ofne ‘if anyone should refuse it, that he must be burned on the hot oven’ Example (41) has wandian ‘to hesitate’, and (42) and (43) show forwyrnan ‘to deny’, all of which illustrate the expletive negative. Example (44) has belean ‘to prevent’ from a homily of the transitional period; this verb does not seem to have an example of the expletive negative in Old English. (41) CP 23.177.11 ond on oðre wisan sint to manianne ða ðe ða word ðære halgan æ ryhte ne ongietað, on oðre ða ðe hi ryhtlice ongietað, ד ðeah for eaðmodnesse wandiað ðæt hi hit ne sprecað; ‘And in one way those are to be admonished who do not rightly understand the words of the holy law, in another those who rightly understand them, and yet for humility hesitate to speak it’ (42) ÆCHom 27 48 Eala þu casere, nast þu þa micelnysse þæra manna slege[s] þe ðu gefremodest þurh þine reðnysse, ne þin mód ne oncnæwð þone micclan hefe þinre dyrstignysse þe þu gedon hæfst; oððe hwæþer þin miht þe mæge forwyrnan þæt ðu þas synne ne sceole oncnawan? ‘O you Caesar, do you not know the greatness of manslaughter which you did through your cruelty, or does your mind not perceive the great burden of your presumption which you have made, or whether your power which could deny that you must recognise these sins?’ (43) ÆCHom 30 75 ac gyf hyt se witega wære, he wolde him forwyrnan þæt he to hym ne gebæde, his Hælende on teonan; He forbead þæt hi ne weopon 33 ‘but if it were the prophet, he wished to deny him that he should pray for him, in view of insulting his Lord’ (44) TrinHom 107.10 and for to bileande þat no man werpe þe gilt of his sinne anuppen god ‘and to prevent that anyone should throw the guilt of his sins upon God’ Tweogan, tweonian, and tweo beon behave slightly differently from other verbs or verbal phrases. They always take ‘ne + Verb + þæt + ne’, i.e. the main verb or verb phrase is negated as well as the content of the following þæt-clause. Examples are (45) from Boethius (Cotton Otho A. vi, mid-tenth century), (46) and (47) from homilies in the late tenth to the eleventh century, and (48) from the transitional period. (45) Bo 37.113.21 Forðæm ne þearf nænne wisne mon tweogan þæt ða yflan næbben eac ecu edlean hiora yfles; þæt bið ece wite. ‘For no wise man need doubt that the evil men do not also have eternal reward for their evil, that is eternal punishment’ (tr. Godden & Irvine) (46) HomU 11 (ScraggVerc 7) 66 Nu sio idelnes swa swiðe þam lichoman dereð, ne tweoge þe na þæt hio þære sawle ne sceððe, ‘Now idleness greatly injures the body; doubt that not at all, that it cannot (but) injure the soul’ (tr. Nicholson) (47) HomS 17 (BlHom 5) 178 forþon nis nan tweo þæt he forgifnesse syllan nelle þam þe hie geearnian willaþ. ‘for there is no doubt that he will grant forgiveness to those who desire to merit it’ (48) BodHom (Bod343) 52.21 Þeah ðe þenne hwylc mon beó swiðe sinful, ד arleas, ד unrihtwis, ne sceal he him tweoniȝæn þæt he ne maȝe Godes mildheortnesse biȝitæn, ȝif he wyle to dædbote cýrræn. 34 Michiko Ogura ‘Any man, then, although he is very sinful, and wicked, and unrighteous, shall not doubt the possibility of his obtaining God’s mercy, if he will turn to repentance’ (tr. Belfour) This feature is handed down to French loan verb douten (see Ogura 2007); examples are (49) and (50) from Cursor Mundi (Cotton Vespasian A. iii and Göttingen). In Merlin (?c. 1450), an example from MED, which I quote in (51), there is no negation of the main verb and the context shows a slightly different sense. The last example (52) is another loan verb denien from Chaucer’s Boece (c. 1380). (49) Cursor 10869 C: þis leuedi nathing doted sco þat godd ne moght his will do, G: Þis leudy na-thing doutid scho, þat godd ne miht his wille al do, ‘This lady she doubted nothing that God could do his will’ (50) Cursor 12321 C: For sco was traist and duted noght, þat godds wil ne suld be wroght. cf. T: She was trusty & douted nouȝt But goddess wille wolde be wrouȝt ‘For she was faithful and did not doubt that God’s will should be done’ (51) Merlin (CmbFf.3.11) I 6.9 (MED: douten that .. nought fear lest (sth. happen)) he [deuell] dought that he myght not wynne hem [these sustres] by felschip of man, with-oute counseille of some woman; cf. 30 I doubte that ye will me sle. (52) Chaucer Bo III Prose 10.12 But it may nat be denyed that thilke good ne is, and that it nys ryght as a welle of alle goodes. 3. Conclusion It was Visser (1963–1973) who first explained appropriately on this construction with examples of both an affirmative and a negative þæt-clause from one of the earliest Old English texts of Cura Pastoralis, and Mitchell (1985: §§2039–2043) used the term “expletive negative” for this construction, as he explained it with many examples in his Old English Syntax. But after them, some He forbead þæt hi ne weopon 35 overgeneralisation has been accepted that the construction of expletive negative was a feature throughout the Old English period. From my investigation focused on Old English up and early Middle English some points have been made manifest: (i) A verb with negative import shows a tendency to invite the negative particle ne in the dependent clause it takes, owing to the negative import of the governing verb; this is a kind of correlative construction based on Old English syntax; (ii) Alternative expressions like ‘Verb (with negative import) and Verb of saying + direct speech or indirect speech (with ne)’ may suggest that the construction ‘Verb (with negative import) + þæt + ne’ is not illogical but a contracted and correlative form, meaning ‘he forbade saying, “You should not do that”’ or ‘he forbade and said that I should not do that’; (iii) ‘Verb (with negative import) + to-infinitive’ was found in Old English as an alternative of ‘Verb (with negative import) + þæt-clause’ with or without ne, which means that the shift from forbid that to forbid to is a tendency rather than a historical development; (iv) The ‘Verb (with negative import) + þæt + ne’ construction could be highly deemed in late Old English and early Middle English as Anglo- Saxon syntax. In addition, the fact that the distinction between direct and indirect speech was not so complete as in the present-day English can be a cause of the existence of this construction, since þæt could be employed as an indicator of direct speech in biblical contexts, and also the fact that OE prefix for- could not be morphologically distinguished in two senses, i.e. in the sense of opposition (cf. G ver-) and in the sense of emphasis (cf. G vor-), has made the Old English syntax less explicit. References DICTIONARIES BT An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary. 1898; rpt. 1972. Ed. J. Bosworth. London, Oxford University Press. BTS An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary. Supplement. 1921; rpt. 1973. Eds. J. Bosworth & T. N. Toller. With revised and enlarged addenda by A. Campbell. London, Oxford University Press. DOE: Dictionary of Old English, A–G in CD-ROM. 2008. The Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, University of Toronto. DOEWC: Dictionary of Old English Web Corpus. 2009-. Eds. A. diPaolo Healey et al. Toronto, University of Toronto Press. www.doe.utoronto.ca 36 Michiko Ogura MED: Middle English Dictionary. 1952–2001. Eds. H. Kurath, S. M. Kuhn, J. Reidy & R. E. Lewis. Ann Arbor, University of Michigan Press. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/med OED3: The Oxford English Dictionary Online. 3rd ed. 2015. Oxford, Oxford University Press. www.oed.com SECONDARY SOURCES Ishiguro, T. 1998: Verbs of Negative Import: A Syntactic Study that Benefited from the Dictionary of Old English Project. Old English Newsletter 26: 23–32. Iyeiri, Y. 2010: Verbs of Implicit Negation and their Complements in the History of English. Amsterdam & Philadelphia, John Benjamins. Ker, N. R. 1957/1990: Catalogue of Manuscripts containing Anglo-Saxon. Oxford, Clarendon Press. Mitchell, B. 1985: Old English Syntax, 2 vols. Oxford, Clarendon Press. Ogura, M. 1988: Direct or Indirect? — þæt as a Quotation Indicator. In O. Kinshiro et al. eds. Philologia Anglica. Essays Presented to Professor Yoshio Terasawa on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday. Tokyo, Kenkyusha: 88–105. Ogura, M. 2007: ME douten and dreden. In G. D. Caie ed. The Power of Words in Lexicography, Lexicology and Semantics in Honour of Christian Kay. Amsterdam, Rodopi: 117–130. van der Wurff, W. 1999: On Expletive Negation with Adversative Predicates in the History of English. In I. Tieken-Boon van Ostade, G. Tottie & W. van der Wurff eds. Negation in the History of English. Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter: 295–327. Visser, F. Th. 1963–1973: An Historical Syntax of the English Language. 3 Parts, 4 vols. Leiden, Brill. Wallage, P. W. 2017: Negation in Early English Grammatical and Functional Change. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Author’s address School of Arts and Sciences Tokyo Woman’s Christian University 2-6-1 Zempukuji, Suginami-ku Tokyo 167-8585, Japan received: 14 October 2019 e-mail: ogura.dainagon@jcom.home.ne.jp revised version accepted: 21 January 2020