Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
| en:eebo:competing_forms [2016/08/18 10:37] – veronikapojarova | en:eebo:competing_forms [2018/07/30 14:43] (current) – vaclavcvrcek | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| - | ====== Lesson 3: Competing forms. ====== | + | ====== Lesson 3: Competing forms ====== |
| - | Language change often takes place as a result of one emergent form replacing an already existing one. Variation within language leads to the advent of a new form, which may or may not go on to replace the older one. This process generally takes place over the course of decades or centuries, and therefore is observable in the EEBO corpus. One of the most widespread changes taking place in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was the adoption of a new third person singular ending < -(e)s>. | + | Language change often takes place as a result of one emergent form replacing an already existing one. Variation within language leads to the advent of a new form, which may or may not go on to replace the older one. This process generally takes place over the course of decades or centuries, and therefore is observable in the [[en: |
| ====== Third person singular endings < -eth> and < -es> ====== | ====== Third person singular endings < -eth> and < -es> ====== | ||
| - | Early Modern English, the third person singular ending in the present tense had two possible realizations. The older form, the now archaic < -eth> or < -th>, originated from the OE < -eþ> and was still the dominant variant at the beginning of the period. From the Northern dialects of English there came the form < -s> or < -es>, which gradually began to replace. For most of the Early Modern English period the two forms coexisted. Therefore texts written in the sixteenth century may contain both //knows// and // | + | Early Modern English, the third person singular ending in the present tense had two possible realizations. The older form, the now archaic < -eth> or < -th>, originated from the OE < -eþ> and was still the dominant variant at the beginning of the period. From the Northern dialects of English there came the form < -s> or < -es>, which gradually began to replace. For most of the Early Modern English period the two forms coexisted. Therefore texts written in the sixteenth century may contain both //knows// and // |
| ====== Searching the corpus ====== | ====== Searching the corpus ====== | ||
| Line 32: | Line 33: | ||
| After we input the query, we get a concordance view of the results, containing all the forms we have included in the search. What we need is a breakdown of the results by period, so that we can see the development of the variants over time. Frequency -> Text Types on the menu bar shows us a list of frequencies by period and by decade. By default, the results are ordered by frequency. By clicking on the text **doc.decade** we can order the results chronologically. | After we input the query, we get a concordance view of the results, containing all the forms we have included in the search. What we need is a breakdown of the results by period, so that we can see the development of the variants over time. Frequency -> Text Types on the menu bar shows us a list of frequencies by period and by decade. By default, the results are ordered by frequency. By clicking on the text **doc.decade** we can order the results chronologically. | ||
| - | // | ||
| + | The frequency list by period and decade for the < -es> ending: | ||
| + | {{: | ||
| + | |||
| The table can be simply copied into a spreadsheet application (for example Excel) and a graph made based on the i.p.m. of the forms. It is essential to use the frequency count per million words (i.p.m) because the size of the texts varies with every decade, and viewing the results in relative terms (rather than absolute) ensures the most accurate representation. Please note that if there are no occurrences in a given decade, it is not displayed (e.g. 1480-1489 for the ending < -(e)s>) | The table can be simply copied into a spreadsheet application (for example Excel) and a graph made based on the i.p.m. of the forms. It is essential to use the frequency count per million words (i.p.m) because the size of the texts varies with every decade, and viewing the results in relative terms (rather than absolute) ensures the most accurate representation. Please note that if there are no occurrences in a given decade, it is not displayed (e.g. 1480-1489 for the ending < -(e)s>) | ||
| - | // | + | |
| + | The graph showing the coexistence of the third person singular endings < -eth> and < -es>: | ||
| + | {{: | ||
| The graph shows that in the fifteenth century, the dental < -(e)th> ending was essentially the only available one for the present tense of the third person singular. At the beginning of the seventeenth century, the Northern forms with < -(e)s> began to appear and by as early as 1640 they were in the majority. The question is whether the process was the same for other verbs, or whether verbs with lower frequencies were more (or less) resistant to the adoption of a new ending. | The graph shows that in the fifteenth century, the dental < -(e)th> ending was essentially the only available one for the present tense of the third person singular. At the beginning of the seventeenth century, the Northern forms with < -(e)s> began to appear and by as early as 1640 they were in the majority. The question is whether the process was the same for other verbs, or whether verbs with lower frequencies were more (or less) resistant to the adoption of a new ending. | ||
| - | === Task: Do try this at home === | + | === Task: Try another verb === |
| <WRAP round help 50%> | <WRAP round help 50%> | ||
| Line 48: | Line 54: | ||
| </ | </ | ||
| + | ---- | ||
| + | |||
| + | **If you are ready, you can continue to [[en: | ||
| + | |||
| + | ---- | ||
