Part 28

(i) In unstressed syllables original long vowels tend to become short. Hence _ŭs_ (OE. _ūs_), and _bŏte_ (OE. _būtan_) 'but', which are usually unstressed.

(ii) All long vowels are shortened in stressed close syllables (i.e., _usually_, when they are followed by two consonants): e.g. _kēpen_, pa. t. _kĕpte_, pp. _kĕpt_; _hŭsband_ beside _hous_; _wĭmmen_ (from _wĭf-men_) beside _wīf_.

_Exception._ Before the groups _-ld_, _-nd_, _-rd_, _-rð_, _-mb_, a short vowel is lengthened in OE. unless a third consonant immediately follows. Hence, before any of these combinations, length may be retained in ME.: e.g. _fēnd_ 'fiend', _bīnden_, _chīld_; but _chĭldren_.

(iii) Short vowels _ă_, _ĕ_, _ŏ_ are lengthened in stressed open syllables (i.e., _usually_, when they are followed by a single consonant with a following vowel): _tă|ke_ > _táke_; _mĕ|te_ > _méte_ 'meat'; _brŏ|ken_ > _bróken_. To what extent _ĭ_ and _ŭ_ were subject to the same lengthening in Northern districts is still disputed. Normally they remain short in South and S. Midlands, e.g. _drĭuen_ pp.; _lŏuen_ = _lŭven_ 'to love'.

There are many minor rules and many exceptions due to analogy; but roughly it may be taken that ME. vowels are:

_short_ when unstressed;

_short_ before two consonants, except _-ld_, _-nd_, _-rd_, _-rð_, _-mb_;

_long_ (except _i_ (_y_), _u_) before a single medial consonant;

otherwise of the quantity shown in the Glossary for the OE. or ON. etymon.

(_b_) #Vowel Quality.# The ME. sound-changes are so many and so obscure that it will be possible to deal only with a few that contribute most to the diversity of dialects, and it happens that the particular changes noticed all took effect before the fourteenth century.

(i) OE. and ON. _ā_ develop to long open _ǭ_ (sounded as in _broad_), first in the South and S. Midlands, later in the N. Midlands. In the North _ā_ (sounded approximately as in _f~a~ther_) remains: e.g. _bane_ 'bone' IV _a_ 54, _balde_ 'bold' IV _a_ 51. The boundary seems to have been a line drawn west from the Humber, and this approximates to the dividing line in the modern dialects. There are of course instances of _ǭ_ to the north and of _ā_ to the south of the Humber, since border speakers would be familiar with both _ā_ and _ǭ_, or would have intermediate pronunciations; and poets might use convenient rimes from neighbouring dialects.

(ii) OE. _ȳ̆_ (deriving from Germanic _ū̆_ followed by _i_) appears _normally_ in E. Midlands and the North as _ī̆_ (_ȳ̆_): e.g. _kȳn_, _hill_ (OE. _cȳ_, _hyll_). In the South-East, particularly Kent, it appears as _ẹ̆̄_: _kēn_, _hell_. In the South-West, and in W. Midlands, it commonly appears as _u_, _ui_ (_uy_), with the sound of short or long _ü_. London was apparently at a meeting point of the _u_, _i_, and _e_ boundaries, because all the forms appear in fourteenth-century London texts, though _ṻ̆_ and _ē̆_ gradually give place to _ī̆_. The extension of _ṻ̆_ forms to the North-West is shown by _Gawayne_, and a line drawn from London to Liverpool would give a rough idea of the boundary. But within this area unrounding of _ṻ̆_ to _ī̆_ seems to have been progressive during the century. N.B.—It is dangerous to jump to conclusions from isolated examples. Before _r_ + consonant _e_ is sometimes found in all dialects, e.g. _schert_ II 230. _Church_, spelt with _u_, _i_, or _e_, had by etymology OE. _i_, not _y_. And in Northern texts there are a number of _e_-spellings in open syllables, both for OE. _y_ and _i_.

(_c_) #Consonants#:

(i) _f_ > _v_ (initial): this change, which dates back to OE. times, is carried through in _Ayenbyte_: e.g. _uele uayre uorbisnen_ = Midland '_fele fayre forbisnes_'. In some degree it extended over the whole of the South.

(ii) _s_ > _z_ (initial), parallel to the change of _f_ to _v_, is regularly represented in spelling in the _Ayenbyte_: _zome_ 'some', &c. Otherwise _z_ is rare in spelling, but the voiced initial sound probably extended to most of the Southern districts where it survives in modern dialect.

§ 8. PRONUNCIATION. One of the best ways of studying ME. pronunciation is to learn by heart a few lines of verse in a consistent dialect, and to correct their repetition as more precise knowledge is gained. The spelling can be relied on as very roughly phonetic if the exceptional usages noted in § 6 are kept in mind. Supplementary and controlling information is provided by the study of rimes, of alliteration, and of the history of English and French sounds.

#Consonants.# Where a consonant is clearly pronounced in Modern English, its value is nearly enough the same for ME. But modern spelling preserves many consonants that have been lost in speech, and so is rather a hindrance than a help to the beginner in ME. For instance, the initial sounds in ME. _kniȝt_ and _niȝt_ were not the same, for _kniȝt_ alliterates always with _k-_ (V 43, 107) and _niȝt_ with _n-_ (VII 149); and initial _wr-_ in _wringe_, _wriȝte_ is distinct from initial _r-_ in _ring_, _riȝt_ (cp. alliteration in VIII _a_ 168, V 136). Nor can _wriȝte_ rime with _write_ in a careful fourteenth-century poem. In words like _lerne_, _doghter_, _r_ was pronounced with some degree of trilling. And although there are signs of confusion in late MSS. (IV _a_, XVI, XVII), double consonants were generally distinguished from single: _sonne_ 'sun' was pronounced _sŭn-ne_, and so differed from _sone_ 'son', which was pronounced _sŭ-ne_ (§ 6 vi).

#Vowels.# Short vowels _ă_, _ĕ_, _ĭ_, _ŏ_, _ŭ_ (§ 6 vi) were pronounced respectively as in French _patte_, English _pet_, _pit_, _pot_, _put_. Final unstressed _-e_ was generally syllabic, with a sound something like the final sound in _China_ (§ 9).

The long vowels _ā_, _ī_, _ū_ (§ 6 v) were pronounced approximately as in _f~a~ther_, _mach~i~ne_, _cr~u~de_. But _ē_ and _ō_ present special difficulties, because the spelling failed to make the broad distinction between open _ǭ_ and close _ọ̄_, open _ę̄_ and close _ẹ̄_—a distinction which, though relative only (depending on the greater or less opening of the mouth passage), is proved to have been considerable by ME. rimes, and by the earlier and subsequent history of the long sounds represented in ME. by _e_, _o_.

(i) Open _ǭ_ (as in _broad_) derives:

(_a_) from OE. _ā_, according to § 7 b i: OE. _brād_, _bāt_, _báld_ > ME. _brǭd_, _bǭt_, _bǭld_ > NE. _broad_, _boat_, _bold_. The characteristic modern spelling is thus _oa_.

(_b_) from OE. _ŏ_ in open syllables according to § 7 a iii: OE. _brŏcen_ > ME. _brǫ́́ke(n)_ > NE. _broken_.

NOTE.—In many texts the rimes indicate a distinction in pronunciation between _ǭ_ derived from OE. _ā_ and _ǭ_ derived from OE. _ŏ_, and the distinction is still made in NW. Midland dialects.

(ii) Close _ọ̄_ (pronounced rather as in French _beau_ than as in standard English _so_ which has developed a diphthong _ọu_), derives from OE. _ō_: OE. _gōs_, _dōm_, _góld_ > ME. _gọ̄s_, _dọ̄m_, _gọ̄ld_ > NE. _goose_, _doom_, _gold_. The characteristic modern spelling is _oo_.

NOTE.—(1) After consonant + _w_, _ǭ_ often develops in ME. to _ọ̄_: OE. _(al)swā_, _twā_ > ME. _(al)sǭ_, _twǭ_ > later _(al)sọ̄_, _twọ̄_.

(2) In Scotland and the North _ọ̄_ becomes regularly a sound (perhaps _ǖ_) spelt _u_: _gōd_ > _gud_, _blōd_ > _blud_, &c.

Whereas the distribution of _ǭ_ and _ọ̄_ is practically the same for all ME. dialects, the distinction of open _ę̄_ and close _ẹ̄_ is not so regular, chiefly because the sounds from which they derive were not uniform in OE. dialects. For simplicity, attention will be confined to the London dialect, as the forerunner of modern Standard English.

(iii) South-East Midland open _ę̄_ (pronounced as in _there_) derives:

(_a_) from OE. (Anglian) _ǣ_: Anglian _dǣl_ > SE. Midl. _dę̄l_ > NE. _deal_;

(_b_) from OE. _ēa_: OE. _bēatan_ > ME. _bę̄te(n)_ > NE. _beat_;

(_c_) from OE. _ĕ_ in open syllables according to § 7 a iii: OE. _mĕte_ > ME. _mę́te_ > NE. _meat_.

The characteristic modern spelling is _ea_.

(iv) South-East Midland close _ẹ̄_ (pronounced as in French _été_) derives:

(_a_) from OE. (Anglian) _ē_ of various origins: Anglian _hēr_, _mēta(n)_, _(ge)lēfa(n)_ > SE. Midl. _hẹ̄re_, _mẹ̄te(n)_, _lẹ̄ue(n)_ > NE. _here_, _meet_, _(be)lieve_.

(_b_) from OE. _ēo_: OE. _dēop_, _þēof_ > ME. _dẹ̄p_, _þẹ̄f_ (_þief_) > NE. _deep_, _thief_.

The characteristic modern spellings are _ee_, and _ie_ which already in ME. often distinguishes the close sound (§ 6 ii).

NOTE.—The distinction made above does not apply in South-Eastern (Kentish), because this dialect has ME. _ea_, _ia_, _ya_ for OE. _ēa_ (iii b), and OE. _ē_ for Anglian _ǣ_ (iii a). Nor does it hold for South-Western, because the West Saxon dialect of OE. had _gelīefan_ for Anglian _gelēfa(n)_ (iv a). West Saxon also had _strǣt_, _-drǣdan_, where normal Anglian had _strẹ̄t_, _-drẹ̄da(n)_, but the distribution of the place-names _Stratton_ beside _Stretton_, and of the pa. t. and pp. _dradd(e)_ beside _dredd(e)_ (p. 270 and n.), shows that the _ǣ_ forms were common in the extreme South and the East of the Anglian area; so that in fourteenth-century London both _ę̄_ and _ẹ̄_ might occur in such words, as against regular West Midland and Northern _ẹ̄_.

In NE. Midland and Northern texts some _ē_ sounds which we should expect to be distinguished as open and close rime together, especially before dental consonants, e.g. _ȝēde_ (OE. _ēode_): _lēde_ (Anglian _lǣda(n)_) I 152-3.

§ 9. INFLEXIONS. Weakening and levelling of inflexions is continuous from the earliest period of English. The strong stress falling regularly on the first or the stem syllable produced as reflex a tendency to indistinctness in the unstressed endings. The disturbing influence of foreign conquest played a secondary but not a negligible part, as may be seen from a comparison of some verbal forms in the North and the N. Midlands, where Norse influence was strongest, with those of the South, where it was inconsiderable:

Normal Early Early Old OE. Sth. Nth.and Norse ME. N. Midl. Infin. _drīfan_ _driue(n)_ _driue_ _drífa_ Pres. p. _drīfende_ _driuinde_ _driuande_ _drífandi_ Pp. strong _gedrifen_ _ydriue_ _driuen_ _drifenn_

and although tangible evidence of French influence on the flexional system is wanting (for occasional borrowings like _gowtes artetykes_ IX 314 are mere literary curiosities), every considerable settlement of foreign speakers, especially when they come as conquerors, must shake the traditions of the language of the conquered. A third cause of uncertainty was the interaction of English dialects in different stages of development.

The practical sense of the speakers controlled and balanced these disruptive factors. There is no better field than Middle English for a study of the processes of vigorous growth: the regularizing of exceptional and inconvenient forms; the choice of the most distinctive among a group of alternatives; the invention of new modes of expression; the discarding of what has become useless.

At the beginning of the fourteenth century the inflexional endings are: _-e_; _-en_; _-ene_ (weak gen. pl.); _-er_ (comparative); _-es_; _-est_; with _-eþ_, _-ede_ (_-de_, _-te_), _-ed_ (_-d_, _-t_), _-ynge_ (_-inde_, _-ende_, _-ande_), which are verbal only.

NOTE.—(_a_) Sometimes one of these inflexions may be substituted for another: e.g. when _-es_ replaces _-e_ as the Northern ending of the 1st sg. pres. ind. Such analogical substitutions must be distinguished from phonetic developments.

(_b_) In disyllabic inflexions like _-ede_, _-ynge_ (_-ande_), final _-e_ is lost early in the North. In polysyllables it is dropped everywhere during the century.

(_c_) The indistinct sound of flexional _-e-_ covered by a consonant is shown by spellings with _-i-_, _-y-_: _woundis_ X 51; _madist_ XI _b_ 214; _blyndiþ_ XI _b_ 7; _fulfillid_ XVI 6; _etin_ XIV _b_ 76; _brokynne_ XVI 195. And, especially in West Midland texts, _-us_, _-un_ (_-on_) appear for _-es_, _-en_: _mannus_ XI _b_ 234; _foundun_ XI _a_ 47; _laghton_ VII 119. Complete syncope sometimes occurs: _days_ I 198, &c.

Otherwise all the inflexions except _-e_, _-en_, are fairly stable throughout the century.

#-en#: In the North _-en_ is found chiefly in the strong pp., where it is stable. In the South (except in the strong pp.) it is better preserved, occurring rarely in the dat. sg. of adjectives, e.g. _onen_ III 4, dat. pl. of nouns, e.g. _diaknen_ III 5, and in the infinitive; more commonly in the weak pl. of nouns, where it is stable, and in the pa. t. pl., where it alternates with _-e_. In the Midlands _-en_, alternating with _-e_, is also the characteristic ending of the pres. ind. pl. As a rule (where the reduced ending _-e_ is found side by side with _-en_) _-e_ is used before words beginning with a consonant, and _-en_ before words beginning with a vowel or _h_, to avoid hiatus. But that the preservation of _-en_ does not depend purely on phonetic considerations is proved by its regular retention in the Northern strong pp., and its regular reduction to _-e_ in the corresponding Southern form.

#-e#: Wherever _-en_ was reduced, it reinforced final _-e_, which so became the meeting point of all the inflexions that were to disappear before Elizabethan times.

_-e_ was the ending of several verbal forms; of the weak adjective and the adjective pl.; of the dat. sg. of nouns; and of adverbs like _faste_, _deepe_, as distinguished from the corresponding adjectives _fast_, _deep_.

That _-e_ was pronounced is clear from the metres of Chaucer, Gower, and most other Southern and Midland writers of the time. For centuries the rhythm of their verse was lost because later generations had become so used to final _-e_ as a mere spelling that they did not suspect that it was once syllabic.

But already in fourteenth-century manuscripts there is evidence of uncertainty. Scribes often omit the final vowel where the rhythm shows that it was syllabic in the original (see the language notes to I, II). Conversely, in _Gawayne_ forms like _burne_ (OE. _beorn_), _race_ (ON. _rás_), _hille_ (OE. _hyll_) appear in nominative and accusative, where historically there should be no ending. The explanation is that, quite apart from the workings of analogy, which now extended and now curtailed its historical functions, _-e_ was everywhere weakly pronounced, and was dropped at different rates in the various dialects. In the North it hardly survives the middle of the century (IV _a_, X). In the N. Midlands its survival is irregular. In the South and S. Midlands it is fairly well preserved till the end of the century. But everywhere the proportion of flexionless forms was increasing. It may be assumed that, in speech as in verse, final _-e_ was lost phonetically first before words beginning with a vowel or _h_.

§ 10. NOUNS: Gender, which in standard West Saxon had been to a great extent grammatical (i.e. dependent on the forms of the noun), was by the fourteenth century natural (i.e. dependent on the meaning of the noun). This change had accompanied and in some degree facilitated the transfer of nearly all nouns to the strong masculine type, which was the commonest and best defined in late OE.:

OE. ME. Sg. nom. acc. _cniht_ _kniȝt_ gen. _cnihtes_ _kniȝtes_ dat. _cnihte_ _kniȝte_

OE. ME. Pl. nom. acc. _cnihtas_ _kniȝtes_ gen. _cnihta_ _kniȝtes_ dat. _cnihtum_ _kniȝtes_

In the North final _-e_ of the dat. sg. was regularly dropped early in the fourteenth century, and even in the South the dat. sg. is often uninflected, probably owing to the influence of the accusative. In the plural the inflexion of the nom. acc. spreads to all cases; but in early texts, and relatively late in the South, the historical forms are occasionally found, e.g. gen. pl. _cniste_ (MS. _cnistes_) XV _g_ 30 (note), dat. pl. _diaknen_ III 5.

#Survivals#: (i) The common mutated plurals _man_: _men_, _fot_: _fet_, &c., are preserved, and in VIII _b_ a gen. pl. _menne_ (OE. _manna_) occurs; _ky_ pl. of _cow_ forms a new double pl. _kyn_, see (iii) below; _hend_ pl. of _hand_ is Norse, cp. XVI 75 (note).

(ii) Some OE. neuters like _shep_ 'sheep' VIII _b_ 18, _ȝer_ 'year' II 492, _þing_ II 218, _folk_ II 389, resist the intrusion of the masculine pl. _-es_ in nominative and accusative. Pl. _hors_ II 304, XIII _a_ 34 remains beside _horses_ XIV _b_ 73; but _deores_ 'wild animals' occurs at XV _b_ 29, where Modern English preserves _deer_.

(iii) In the South the old weak declension with pl. _-en_ persists, though by the fourteenth century the predominance of the strong type is assured. The weak forms occur not only where they are historically justified, e.g. _eyȝen_ (OE. _ēagan_) II 111, but also by analogy in words like _honden_ (OE. pl. _honda_) II 79, _tren_ (OE. pl. _trēo_) XIII _a_ 51, _platen_ (OFr. _plate_) XV _g_ 4. The inflexion still survives in three double plural formations: _children_ VIII _b_ 70 beside _childer_ (OE. pl. _cildru_); _bretheren_ VIII _a_ 201 beside _brether_ XVII 320 (OE. pl. _brōþor_); and _kyȝn_ IX 256 for _ky_ (cp. (i) above). The OE. weak gen. pl. in _-ena_ leaves its traces in the South, e.g. _knauene_ VIII _b_ 56, XV _h_ 4, and unhistorical _lordene_ VIII _b_ 77.

(iv) The group _fader_, _moder_, _broþer_, _doghter_ commonly show the historical flexionless gen. sg., e.g. _doghtyr arme_ I 136; _moder wombe_ XI _b_ 29 f.; _brother hele_ XII _a_ 18; _Fadir voice_ XVI 79.

(v) The historical gen. sg. of old strong feminines remains in _soule dede_ (OE. _sāwle_) I 212; but _Lady day_ (OE. _hlǣfdigan dæg_) I 242 is a survival of the weak fem. gen. sg.

§ 11. ADJECTIVES. Separate flexional forms for each gender are not preserved in the fourteenth century; but until its end the distinction of strong and weak declensions remains in the South and South Midlands, and is well marked in the careful verse of Chaucer and Gower. The strong is the normal form. The weak form is used after demonstratives, _the_, _his_, &c., and in the vocative. As types _god_ (OE. _gōd_) 'good' and _grene_ (OE. _grēne_) 'green' will serve, because in OE. _grēne_ had a vowel-ending in the strong nom. sg. masc., while _gōd_ did not. The ME. paradigms are:

Singular. Plural. Strong Weak Strong and Weak _god_ _godė_ _godė_ _grenė_ _grenė_ _grenė_

Examples: Strong sg. _a gret serpent_ (OE. _grēat_) XII _b_ 72; _an unkindė man_ (OE. _uncynde_) XII _b_ 1; _a stillė water_ (OE. _stille_) XII _a_ 83. Weak sg. _The gretė gastli serpent_ XII _b_ 126; _hire oghnė hertes lif_ XII _a_ 4; _O lef liif_ (where the metre indicates _leuė_ for the original) II 102. Strong pl. _þer wer widė wones_ II 365. Weak pl. _the smalė stones_ XII _a_ 84.

Note that strong and weak forms are identical in the plural; that even in the singular there is no formal distinction when the OE. strong masc. nom. ended in a vowel (_grēne_); that monosyllables ending in a vowel (e.g. _fre_), polysyllables, and participles, are usually invariable; and that regular dropping of final _-e_ levels all distinctions, so that the North and N. Midlands early reached the relatively flexionless stage of Modern English.

#Survivals.# The _Ayenbyte_ shows some living use of the adjective inflexions. Otherwise the survivals are limited to set phrases, e.g. gen. sg. _nones cunnes_ 'of no kind', _enes cunnes_ 'of any kind', XV _g_ 20, 22. That the force of the inflexion was lost is shown by the early wrong analysis _no skynnes_, _al skynnes_, &c.

#Definite Article.# Parallel to the simplification of the adjective, the full OE. declension _sē_, _sēo_, _þæt_, &c., is reduced to invariable _þe_. The _Ayenbyte_ alone of our specimens keeps some of the older distinctions. Elsewhere traces appear in set phrases, e.g. neut. sg. _þat_, _þet_ in _þat on_ 'the one', _þat oþer_ 'the other' V 344, and, with wrong division, _þe ton_ XI _b_ 27, _the toþer_ IX 4; neut. sg. dat. _þen_ (OE. _þǣm_), with wrong division, in _atte nale_ (for _at þen ale_) VIII _a_ 109.

§ 12. PRONOUNS. In a brilliant study (_Progress in Language_, London 1894) Jespersen exemplifies the economy and resources of English from the detailed history of the Pronoun. In the first and second persons fourteenth-century usage does not differ greatly from that of the Authorized Version of the Bible. But the pronoun of the third person shows a variety of developments. In the singular an objective case replaces, without practical disadvantages, the older accusative and dative: _him_ (OE. _hine_ and _him_), _her(e)_ (OE. _hīe_ and _hiere_), _(h)it_ (OE. _hit_ and _him_). The possessive _his_ still serves for the neuter as well as the masculine, e.g. _þat ryuer... chaungeþ ~hys~ fordes_ XIII _a_ 55 f.; though an uninflected neuter possessive _hit_ occasionally appears in the fourteenth century. In the plural, where one would expect objective _him_ from the regular OE. dat. pl. _him_, clearness is gained by the choice of unambiguous _hem_, from an OE. dat. pl. by-form _heom_.

But as we see from _Orfeo_, ll. 408, 446, 185, in some dialects the nom. sg. masc. (OE. _hē_), nom. sg. fem. (OE. _hēo_), and nom. pl. (OE. _hīe_), had all become ME. _he_. The disadvantages of such ambiguity increased as the flexional system of nouns and adjectives collapsed, and a remedy was found in the adoption of new forms. For the nom. sg. fem., _s(c)he_, _s(c)ho_ (mostly Northern), come into use, which are probably derived from _si̯ē_, _se̯ō_, the corresponding case of the definite article. The innovation was long resisted in the South, and _ho_, an unambiguous development of _heō_, remains late in W. Midland texts like _Pearl_.

In the nom. pl. ambiguous _he_ was replaced by _þei_, the nom. pl. of the Norse definite article. This is the regular form in all except the Southern specimens II (orig.), III, XIII. And although the full series of Norse forms _þei_, _þeir_, _þe(i)m_ is found in Orm at the beginning of the thirteenth century, Chaucer and other Midland writers of the fourteenth century as a rule have only _þei_, with native English _her(e)_, _hem_ in the oblique cases. (For details see the language note to each specimen.)

The poss. pl. _her(e)_, beside _hor(e)_, was still liable to confusion with the obj. sg. fem. _her(e)_, cp. II 92. Consequently this was the next point to be gained by the Norse forms, e.g. in VII 181. In the Northern texts X, XVI, XVII, all from late MSS., the Norse forms _þai_, _þa(i)r_, _þa(i)me_ are fully established; but _(h)em_, which was throughout unambiguous, survived into modern dialects in the South and Midlands.

Note the reduced nominative form _a_ 'he', 'they' in XIII; and the objective _his(e)_ 'her', 'them' in III, which has not been satisfactorily explained.

#Relative#: The general ME. relative is _þat_, representing all genders and cases (note to XV _i_ 4). Sometimes definition is gained by adding the personal pronoun: _þat... he (sche)_ = 'who'; _þat... it_ = 'which'; _þat... his_ = 'whose'; _þat ... him_ = 'whom', &c.; e.g. _a well, ~þat~ in the day ~it~ is so cold_ IX 5-6, cp. V 127 (note); _oon ~That~ with a spere was thirled ~his~ brest-boon_ 'one whose breast-bone was pierced with a spear', _Knight's Tale_ 1851. For the omission of _þat_ see note to XIII _a_ 36.