ePub 版



an þara twelfa (Vulg.: cum esset unus duodecim); 12. 37 Đa he swa mycele tacn Hyde beforan him, hi ne gelyfdon on hyne (Cum ... tanta signa fecisset); Mk. 16. 11 þa hi ... hine gesawon, þa ne gelyfdon hi him (The Vulg. is quite different in meaning : audientes quia ... visus esset ab ea); Int. Sig. 48. 473 Hwi wearð lothes wif awend to sealtstane, þaþa god sende his twegen englas to ahreddene loth 7 his wif? (clause added by translator); 46. 440 Hu mihte abraham beon clæne ... þa þa he hæfde cyfese under his riht wife? (dum conjunctus est ancillae suae); ÆH. 1. 140. 9, 10 he wolde mann beon for us, daða he God wæs, ... he wolde beon þearfa for us, daða he rice wæs; cf. 2. 118. 23.

2. donne.

John 4. 9 Humeta bitst þu æt me drincan, þonne du eart Iudeisc, and ic eom Samaritanisc wif? (Vulg.: Judaeus cum sis); 7. 15 Humeta cann þes stafas, þonne he ne leornode? (Vulg. : cum non didicerit); ÆH. 1. 64. 34 se gytsere wile mare habban þonne him genihtsumað, þonne he furðon orsorh ne bricð his genihtsumnysse; LS. 2. 60. 114 þu þe gelyfdest on me, þonne du me ne gesawe. Đonne represents different antithetic Latin constructions: CP. 209. 16 donne hie wenen ... dæt we him donne secgen (ea quae bene egisse se credunt, male acta monstramus); 211. 17 donne we hira yfel tælað, dat we eac hira god herigen (dum ... alia reprehendendo corripimus, alia ... laudemus). Cf. also Byr. 313. 22, 27.

3. mid dy.

There are no very clear cases of concessive use of this particle without an adversative. The following, however, probably have a tinge of concessive meaning: BH. 454. 13 þære ærfæstnesse þe he him forgifen hæfde, mid þy he ællþeodig wæs (cum esset peregrinus); Guth. 145. 2 Midþy he ... mid arfæstnysse his ealderum underþeoded wæs, hit gelamp sume siðe ... þæt se awyrgeda gast him oneode.

4. mittes.

I have found only one passage where mittes seems to have concessive as well as temporal force. This passage, however, is of interest, since the clause in question is coördinated with a deah-clause: Chad 147. 252 7 mittes he wes heh biscop on orleahtre 7 swilce þeah þe he fram untrumum 7 unwisum preostum were ge

na ge

seah hine mon efre forðon eorne.

5. nu.

Although Adams (p. 61) regards nu as a causal conjunction in use, it is clearly temporal in origin, and I have accordingly placed it here. Bo. 68. 11 forhwy þe haten dysige men mid leasre stemne wuldor, nu du nane neart? 80. 23 Wundorlice cræfte þu hit hæfst gesceapen þæt þ fyr ne forbærnð þ wæter 7 þa eorban, nu hit gemenged is wið „ægðer; Inst. 377. 8 hwi þeos feorpe boc sig uncapitulod nu þa ærran bec synt gecapitulode (cum priores libri ... sint).


The local clause, like the temporal, may become concessive in Modern English, sometimes (as in the passage following) losing all local meaning : Merchant of Venice, IV i. 22 where thou now exact'st the penalty thou wilt ... forgive a moiety of the principal. The same usage is found in Old English, though rarely.

A. With Adversative in the Main Clause. CP. 399. 17 ðær ðær hi done fiell fleoð dære synne, donne magon hie deah weorðan gehælede (et lapsus scelerum fugiunt, et tamen ... salvantur). This is only formally a local clause; the meaning of the particle is like Modern English at the same time that in a concessive sense. This is one of numerous cases where the Old English, not having the Latin habit of balancing phrases, supplies a subordinate construction where the Latin has a coördinate one. Another occurrence of fær: Apoth. 24 Đær dær du neode irsian scyle, gemetiga dæt deah.

B. Without Adversative. The sense of place is clearly retained in the following examples : Dial. 91. 11 þær Paulus ne mihte mid scipe faran, þær Petrus eode mid drigum fotum (ibi Paulus ire

non potuit, ubi Petrus ... iter fecit); Epis. 147. 217 for hwon hie þa hefignesse and micelnisse dara wæpna in swa miclum þurste beran scoldon, þær nænig feond ne æteowde.

The adversative sense predominates here: Bo. 60. 3 þte ponan þe hi tiohhiað þ hi scylan eadigran weorðan, þ hi weorðað þonan earmran 7 eargran (not in the Latin).

Finally, the local meaning may be entirely merged in the concessive: CP. 463. 1 ff. dætte ðær dær he oðerra monna wunda lacnað (aliorum vulnera medendo), he self ne weorde aðunden ... ðæt he hine selfne ne forlæte ðær he oðerra freonda tilige (proximos juvando) & him self ne afealle, Jær dær he oðre tiolað to ræranne (ne alios erigens cadat). The following less formal sentence is exactly like the colloquial construction in Modern English: Byr. 313. 20 Swylce he cweðe þu sot, þær he sceolde cweðan þu sott.

CONDITIONAL CLAUSES. The conditional clause, to which the concessive clause is so closely related, is naturally often adapted, in various languages, to concessive use. The existence of this usage in Old English is briefly discussed by Mather (p. 21). In Modern English it is far more important, and partly for a curious reason—the modern emphatic use of the periphrastic verb. A character in Nicholas Nickleby remarks, 'I don't care if I do lose.' This form of concession, in which the weight of the construction is borne by the verb and not by the particle, is very common in familiar speech, and is felt to be more forcible than though I lose. The lack of this resource in Old English considerably restricts the importance of the gif-clause as a means of denoting concession. Nor is any phrase answering to our even if common. Moreover, many apparently concessive gif-clauses prove on examination to be probably not such.

After eliminating doubtful cases, we shall find that in Old English, as in Modern English, concessive conditional clauses fall under two heads : (a) those in which the particle means “although' (with fact or supposition); and (b) those in which it means 'granted,' though in fact.' The distinction is logical rather than grammatical, except that the second type of clause may be converted into an independent sentence with less damage to the emphasis of a passage; is, in fact, less completely subordinated. On similar uses of deah see Chapter II. An analogous classification might perhaps be worked out for temporal and relative concessions; but it has seemed to me futile to superimpose any such logical scheme upon the already complex union of concessive with descriptive and temporal notions. Only with gif and Jeah is the distinction seen in simplicity. Probably, therefore, only with gif and deah was it felt by the Old English writer. Even with gif—as will appear in the paragraphs to follow—it has no great importance. Our first task, meanwhile, is to sift the material.

A. Condition apparently translating a Latin Concession.

Deut. 14. 24 Gif se weg swa lang beo þæt þu þine þing bringan ne mage, bonne syle þu hig (Vulg.: Cum autem longior fuerit via). Here the old English construction, which can hardly be interpreted otherwise than as conditional, is at least as natural as the Vulgate, and may very likely rest upon a variant reading.

CP. 67. 25 Se donne bið siwenige se de his &git bið to don beorhte scinende dæt he mæge ongieten soðfæstnesse, gif hit donne aðristriað ða flæsclican weorc (Lippus vero est, cujus quidem ingenium emicat, sed tamen hoc carnalia opera obscurant). The Latin plainly implies a concession. But the Old English version has a different turn; the translator's effort is perhaps mainly toward definition. "He whose mind is so illumined that he can discern truth, is bleareyed in the case when (or if nevertheless)

On L. 11. 8 see B; on Bo. 20. 21, see C below.

B. Condition followed by an Adversative. Passages translated from the Latin are sometimes ambiguous, since Latin si may be either concessive or conditional. In Bo. 20. 13, Gif þu nu fordæm cwist Þ þu gesælig ne sie, þe þonne neart du þeah ungesælig (Quod si idcircò . . . quoniam non est quod te miserum putes), the gif-clause is a true condition:

[ocr errors]


« 上一頁繼續 »