Zelotes and elnvnges: The Extension of Genitive Singular ‑es in the Gloss to the Durham Collectar

Abstract

The aim of this article is to study the extension of genitive singular ‑es from the a-stems to other noun classes in the gloss to the Durham Collectar (Durham, Cathedral Library, A.iv.19). To this end a quantitative analysis of sixty-five nouns has been carried out in contexts where they gloss a Latin genitive form. The nouns have been selected on the basis that their etymological inflection for the genitive singular is other than ‑es, and they consist of feminine nouns (nouns ending in ‑ung, nouns ending in ‑ness, ō‑stems, i‑stems), kinship r‑stems and weak nouns or n‑stems. The results of the analysis of the Durham Collectar are compared with those found in the Lindisfarne Gospels (London, British Library, Nero D.iv) with three main purposes: first, to determine the degree of similarity between the two glosses; second, to establish whether Durham is more conservative or not with regard to this feature, and finally, to contribute to the discussion on the question of authorship.

Changes in progress in late Northumbrian: the extension of -s as genitive and plural marker

“…Comparison of these findings with those obtained from Durham (Rodríguez Ledesma 2018: 622) confirms that the spread of - es to these nouns has advanced further in Durham, where examples of innovative - es outnumber those of the etymological ending: 25 out of a total of 64 (39.06%), as against 9 of - e (14.06%) 13 . This was already pointed out by Ross, who remarked that in Durham the genitive singular in -es coexists with that in -e , and that ‘here, in contradistinction to his practice in L[indisfarne], Aldred has no feeling against -es ’ (1971: 56).…”

“…Ross (1937: 99) remarked that - es was extended to practically all classes in Lindisfarne ( lufes , saules , sibbes , brydes , oxes , widues ), and that this must be considered as the normal form of the genitive singular in this gloss, although older forms are often preserved as well. Analogical extension of - es is also widespread in Durham, as shown by Rodríguez Ledesma (2018). With regard to the plural, Ross (1937: 100) observed that - as was extended to other classes in Lindisfarne ( suordas , ebolsungas , witgas ), although this inflection is not found in the u -stems and in the neuter n- stems.…”

“…With regard to Durham, the extension of - es is widespread in this gloss, no example of the etymological inflection being attested in the genitive of these nouns. Twenty-eight out of a total of 31 occurrences (90.32%) take the innovative ending - es , as against two instances of abbreviated forms (6.45%) 10 and one example of uninflected genitive (Rodríguez Ledesma 2018: 618). Only one of these nouns is attested in the nominative/accusative plural in Durham, bloedsvng , and takes - as : bloedsvngas (1x) (DurRitGl 2 (Thomp-Lind) 126.1).…”

“…With regard to Durham, forms in - es are dominant (63x, 59.43%), followed by abbreviated forms (19x, 17.92%), forms with the etymological inflection (17x, 16.03%) and finally uninflected forms (6x, 5.66%) (Rodríguez Ledesma 2018: 629). Comparison of the two glosses shows a higher percentage of both innovative - es and etymological - e in the genitive of these nouns in Lindisfarne.…”

“…Comparison of the two glosses shows a higher percentage of both innovative - es and etymological - e in the genitive of these nouns in Lindisfarne. In the nominative/accusative plural no example of - as is attested in Durham, only forms ending in a vowel: laro (1x); savlo (5x), savelo (1x); sibba (1x); synna (3x), synno (8x), synne (1x) (Rodríguez Ledesma 2018: 631).…”