« 上一頁繼續 »
it, as did the inadvertent concessive conditions' discussed in Chapter VI. In the passage just quoted the concession is embodied in the relative clause as the first of its coördinate members, the second forming what may be termed the apodosis. This is true in general of such concessions.
That the interpretation of these clauses as concessive is not simply academic or arbitrary is shown by their appearance in place of subordinated Latin constructions: as in John 9. 25 An þing ic wat, þæt ic was blind and þæt ic nu geseo (Vulg. : unum scio, quia caecus cum essem modo video); 10. 33 and for þam þe þu eart man, and wyrcst þe to Gode (Vulg.: et quia tu homo cum sis, facis teipsum Deum); BH. 82. 24 se de in fyre geseted bið 7 beornan ne conn (qui in igne positus nescit ardere).
Concessive clauses of this kind may appear within various subordinate constructions. I cite the most typical examples, italicizing, in each case, the concessive member of the group. Within a substantive clause: 0. 162. 16 pa of þuhte heora ceorlum þæt mon þa beowas freode, 7 hi nolde; LS. 1. 526. 631 him þa for an þuhte þæt he þæs gewiss wære, þæt he þæs on æfen ælcne man gecneowe, and welc gecneowe hine, and he þæs on morgen nænne ne gecneowe ne nan hine. Within a causal clause: HL. 184. 84 þæt ic mæge myd ealre heortan on hyne gelyfan, forþon ic hyne næfre ne geseah and he me swa þeah halne gedyde (here the adversative enforces the concessive meaning). Within an adjective clause, and evidently for the sake of separate emphasis on the protasis’: Wulf. 219. 19 and þam biþ wa æfre geborenum, þe hit secgan can and ne wile; 231. 25 swa hwylc mæssepreost swa hæbbe þis gewrit and nelle cyðan godes folce.
A curious example of attraction from one construction into another is found in the following rather confused sentence: Chad, “Anhang,' l. 37 And se man þe god deþ mid godum inge hyde þ he oþrum men fremige on feo odde on læne 7 seo læn be cume to sumon lape þam men, he bið swa þeah orsorh ... 7 he hæfð his mede his modes goodnesse. This clause, like those I have termed inadvertent concessive conditions,' follows the structure of the clause preceding it, but is equivalent to a deah-clause dependent on the following principal clause. I mention it here rather than among the “relative concessions of Chapter VI because it illustrates so well the influence of one construction upon another.
An example of the baldest juxtaposition within a clause is found in a late portion of the Peterborough Chronicle: Chron. 264. 29 þa ræueden hi 7 brendon alle the tunes Ở wel þu myhtes faren all a dæis fare sculdest thu neure finden man in tune sittende ne land tiled.
In conclusion, the points which seem to me especially noteworthy in connection with the material studied in this chapter are these: the lack of absolute delimitation between subordinate and coördinate structure, and the different degrees to which coördinate constructions may approach grammatical subordination; the double function which a clause or sentence may sometimes have; the influence of Latin in the development of balanced structure (the use of witodlice, of concessive formulae and of the emphatic and); and the fact that naïve and formless structure, far from being peculiar to the earliest stages of Old English prose, appears occasionally in all periods, notably in the late portions of the Chronicle.
CONCESSIVE USE OF PHRASES AND SINGLE
However largely Old English may, in some respects, have been influenced by Latin syntax, and in spite of the existence of pregnant adverbs such as unþances, the substitution of participles or other condensed expressions for full clauses never became the dominant characteristic of the language. This is especially true of concessive constructions; notwithstanding the large adoption of the absolute and of the appositive participle, condensed concessions are somewhat rare. Considerable interest, however, attaches to some of the phrase-constructions which may be found, because of their persistence in the modern speech.
PREPOSITIONAL PHRASES. In Modern English the concessive use of prepositional phrases has become a conspicuous feature of the language. We have a number of definitely concessive prepositions; and the use of all or some similar emphatic word often lends a concessive meaning to with and for. In Old English such constructions also appear, but in less variety, and in less frequent use. The concessive phrases found in Old English prose may be grouped under two heads : those in which the preposition itself has or approaches concessive meaning; and those which, without any particular concessive coloring in the preposition, stand in a concessive relation to the context.
A. Without Concessive Meaning in the Preposition. Those phrases which receive a secondary tinge of concessive meaning may be compared to temporal and modal clauses with concessive force. In the following sentence the concessive relation is not very distinctly marked : Bo. 67. 4 Hwæt, ealle men witan þæt se Seneca wæs Nerone 7 Papinianus Antonie þa weorðestan 7 þa leofostan ... þeah buton ælcre scylde wurdon fordone. It would be possible to translate literally: "and yet, without any fault, they were destroyed.' But there is clearly something more implied, and Sedgefield rightly translates: 'though void of offense. In the following passage, the phrase corresponds to a temporal-concessive clause: BH. 20.30 Đæt se ylca wer ... an easpring of drigre eorðan gebiddende up gelædde 7 ænne æcer of dam gewinne his agenre handa ofer þa tid tæs sæwetes onfeng (ultra tempus serendi ...). The phrase is more purely concessive in the next example: Mart. 20. 11, 12 ond seo gesihð him wæs on swa micelre gemynde þæt he on þæm miclan wintres cele, þonne he ymb þæt þohte odde spræc, þonne aswætte he eall, ond eft on þære miclan sumeres hæte, þonne he his siðfæt gemunde, þonne ablacode he eall ond abifode. Very similar is another on-phrase: LS. 1. 276. 203 pa wundrode se dema þæs wifes anrædnysse, þæt heo nolde andettan on earfopum witum; that she would not confess even under such torture.' An instrumental on takes a concessive shading in one passage: Guth. 146. 20 þa wæs he æt nextan ... to halgum mynstre gelæd, to þon þæt hine messepreostas and bisceopas wið þa
wodnysse þwean and clænsian sceoldon. And hi hwæþere on menigum þingum ne mihton þa yfelan mægn þæs arwyrgdan gastes ofadrifan ; though they tried many expedients.” 1 The Latin original had a very different clause, containing neither instrument nor concession: Cum vero nullus eorum pestiferum funesti spiritus virus exstinguere valuisset.
In the following Biblical quotation, a definite concessive construction in the Latin is ignored: Quot. 167.6 Gif hi nellað gelyfan Moysen and þam witegum, ne gecyrrað hi to dædbote þurh nanes geedcucodes mannes mynegunge (L. 16. 31 ; Vulg.: neque si quis ex mortuis resurrexerit credent). The turn of the sentence is altogether different from the Latin; þurh is used in a pregnant sense—even through’; and the negative nanes adds weight to the phrase.
In this whole group of constructions, the syntactical value of adjectives and adverbs is to be noticed. The relation of the phrase to the sentence, the marking of the contrast which constitutes the concessive relation, is enforced by intensives of one kind and another: ælcre, swa, menigum, nanes, perhaps also miclan. The relation, in fact, is bound up with the substance of the phrase, as is well illustrated by the use of the word menigum.
B. With Concessive Meaning in the Preposition. Although Old English prepositions may sometimes convey the concessive idea, there are no such distinctively concessive prepositions as modern notwithstanding and in spite of. Even those which may be called
i Goodwin translates : 'with many expedients.' (The AS. Prose Version of the Life of St. Guthlac, ed. Goodwin, London, 1848,