« 上一頁繼續 »
simply as existing, but as continuous. Thus the example just quoted might be paraphrased, 'In spite of my drinking more and more, I thirst more and more.'
This form of concessive clause occurs in Boethius, rendering a Latin passage which is grammatically quite different: Bo. 19. 9 Hwa mæg þæm wedendan gietsere genoh forgifan? Swa him mon mare seld, swa hine ma lyst (Largus cum potius muneribus fluens Sitis ardescit habendi). In the following examples, swa ... swa translates the analogous Latin constructions: BH. 136. 14 swa micle swa ic geornlicor ... þæt sylfe soð sohte, swa ic hit læs mette (quanto studiosius ... tanto minus); CP. 347. 11 sua micle sua he ma wat ... sua he ma dysegað, & suiður wienð wið done cræft ðære anmodnesse (the Latin has but one comparative : quasi quo plus sapiunt ... eo ... desipiscunt); Dial. 116. 21 swa ic swyþor drince, swa me swybor Þyrsteð (quo plus bibo, eo plus sitio); Mk. 7. 36 swa he him swibor bebead, swa hi swiðor bodedon (Vulg.: quanto ... eis praecipiebat, tanto magis plus praedicabant); Ex. 1. 12 Swa hig swiðor weron geswencte, swa wæron hig swiðor gemenigfilde (quanto ... tanto magis). The thoroughly stable character of this idiom is shown by the appearance of the double comparative in cases where the Latin has the comparative adverb in only one member of the sentence: Bo. 19. 9; CP. 347. 11; Mk. 7. 36 (taking the Vulg. reading); Ex. 1. 12; Dial. 238. 6. This view is borne out by the appearance of the usual order when the Latin sentence is transposed: Dial. 238. 6 swa myccle ma he ongæt þæt he wæs sylf gebunden, ...swa mycle healicor 7 fæstlicor he forseah pone gylp þyses gewitendlican middaneardes (tantoque sublimius gloriam ... despicere, quanto et religatus agnoverat nil fuisse quod potuerit auferri).
Other instances : Mart. 142. 20 swa hine mon ma hirste, swa wæs he fægerra; ÆH. 1. 268. 27 swa he swiðor afandod bið, swa he rotra bið; LS. 1. 350. 201 swa man ma ofsloh swa þær ma gelyfdon (cf. 2. 426. 15); 2. 442. 253 swa ic his swiðor ehte ... swa ic hine swiðor wyrce wuldor-fulran symle; Adm. 56. 10 swa heo ma forswelgeb, swa heo ma gewilnal; B1. H. 15. 19 swa hie him swyþor styrdon, swa he hludor cleopode; Chron. (Laud Ms.) 218. 18 swa man swydor spæc embe rihte lage, swa mann dyde mare unlaga; 266. 18 æfre þe mare he iaf heom, þe wærse hi wæron him.
NOTE. The example just quoted is the only one I have found in Old English of this construction, in a concessive sense, strengthened by @fre. The same intensive is found in Middle English: Hal. Meid. 7. 32 eauer se þu mare haues se þe schal mare trukie. It is found with the comparative in a causal
or modal sense, chiefly in Wulfstan': Wulf. 104.7 æfre swa he eadmodlicor þæt deð, swa him god ... þe raðer gemiltsað; etc. A is in frequent use with various comparative constructions: Wulf. 189. 6 a swa leng swa wyrse; cf. Bo. 27. 27 a þy betera, and Sol. 36. 5 a de ma; etc.: but I have not observed a with the concessive comparative clause.
DEFINITE EXPRESSIONS OF DEGREE. For comparisons involving the idea of definite quantity or degree, Old English uses the same correlative-swa—as for the indefinite clauses treated in the chapter on indefinite concessions. The two constructions are similar to a casual view, but different in principle. The indefinite clause has the form of an indefinite permission; the definite clause is an adaptation of the simple modal clause, and has an indicative verb. The difference between the two, in
their concessive use, may be illustrated by the differing constructions which, in Modern English, have replaced them. For the indefinite concession of this type, Modern English, for the most part, employs however : Ethics of the Dust, Lecture 4 however few or many you may be, you may soon learn how to crystallize quickly into these two figures. For the definite concession the language has retained the older swa ... swa in the form of as ... as, now almost always reduced to a single as.
Cf. Bartholomew Fair II. i. I have gold left to give these a fairing yet, as hard as the world goes; Heart of Midlothian, ch. 6 Wretched as
he has a share in every promise of Scripture. The construction appears in Orosius, clean-cut and independent of the Latin: 0. 152. 16 swa calde swa hie þa wæron hie gefuhton. This condenses the original, the concessive turn being suggested by foedissimi, annos septuaginta, etc.: Res foedissimi spectaculi erat, duos reges, quorum Lysimachus annos septuaginta et quatuor natus, Seleucus autem septuaginta et septem, arma gerere.
In O. 222. 14, þa frægn Scipia hiene an hwy hit gelang wære þæt Numentię swa raðe ahnescaden, swa hearde swa hie longe wæron, the construction is simpler and less rhetorical than the Latin : qua ope res Numantina aut prius invicta durasset, aut post fuisset eversa.
Further examples: CP. 467. 19 hu fægerne & hu wlitigne monnan ic hæbbe atefred, swa unwlitig writere swa swa ic eom; Gen. 23. 15 (Gen. b) þis wurd is betwux ung, ac, swa micel swa hit is, þu most swaþeah bebirgan þinne deadan þær (Vulg.: sed quantum est hoc? sepeli ...); LS. 1. 216. 110 þæt an þusend manna þe ne magon astyrian, swa unstrang swa du eart; Nic. 484. 29 swa fæla wundra swa se hælend worhte, 7 ge ø gesawon ... for hwig noldon ge gelyfan ? Somewhat peculiar is CP. 99. 21 sua suiðe sua he was upahæfen to dæm ungesewenlicum, he deah gehwyrfde his heortan eage ... This represents a Latin relative and demonstrative: quem sublevatus ad invisibilia erigit, hunc miseratus ad secreta infirmantium oculum cordis flectit. One might expect se ilca, which is much used in this text. Moreover, the quantitative idea seems faint in this passage, and sua suide sua is probably about equivalent to .although'; cf. modern for all in this sense: John 21. 11 (AV. and RV.) for all there were so many.
CONCLUSION. The numerous examples which have been given prove that the concessive use of the six kinds of clauses considered, which is so familiar in our modern speech, was well established in Old English. With respect to the conditional clause, however, some qualification is necessary, since this form of concession is relatively unimportant in Old English. As for the source of these constructions, it is clear that to some extent they form a series independent of those considered in the preceding chapter. Indefinite concessions are found largely in the more distinctly native writings, and in some of the earliest. The secondary concessive clauses treated in this chapter occur largely in works translated from the Latin, even when the clauses themselves are not directly imitated. At the same time, the partly original character of works like Orosius and Boethius, and the very free method of translation applied to them, must be taken into account. Difference in subject matter has also, no doubt, its influence.
The concessive use of the relative clause is very often directly copied from Latin. Especially is this true of the clause containing an adversative. A few clauses are expanded, in translation, from appositive nouns or participles. Of the remaining relative clauses considered, many are found in the works of Ælfric, who was also a writer of Latin. Yet independent use of the concessive relative appears in a few passages of Boethius and the Soliloquies-either because the reading of Latin had made this use familiar, or because the construction was already natural. It is somewhat remarkable that in the Laws, where the relative clause is sometimes used in place of a condition, it is not used in place of a concession. For this reason, I incline to attribute mainly to Latin influence the large use of the concessive relative clause in Old English. At the same time, the combination se ilca de, so often used where the Latin has simply a relative or an appositive, forms a native idiom with antithetic and often concessive meaning.
Of the temporal and local clauses, a large number represent similar Latin constructions, with such particles as ubi, or with conjunctions understood as temporal, such as cum. A number translate vaguer Latin constructions, such as the appositive participle. Others still, which I have not traced to any source, may possibly be due to a Latin original. At the same time, the use of temporal and local concessions in independent passages of Orosius and Boethius indicates a native tendency to the use of this very natural form of speech. There is, moreover, greater significance in the rendering of a participle or appositive by a clause of time or place than in the rendering it by a relative. The latter is mere expansion; the former means the attempt to express a more definite relation. Thus, although Old English may have