This article is about the early medieval language of the Anglo-Saxons. For other uses, seeOld English (disambiguation).
Old English
Englisċ
Ænglisċ
A detail of the first page of theBeowulf manuscript, showing the wordsofer hron rade, translated as "over the whale's road (sea)". It is an example of an Old English stylistic device, thekenning.
Old English (Englisc orÆnglisc,pronounced[ˈeŋɡliʃ] or[ˈæŋɡliʃ]), orAnglo-Saxon,[1] is the earliest recorded form of theEnglish language, spoken inEngland and southern and easternScotland in theEarly Middle Ages. It developed from the languages brought toGreat Britain byAnglo-Saxon settlers in the mid-5th century, and the firstOld English literature dates from the mid-7th century. After theNorman Conquest of 1066, English was replaced for several centuries byAnglo-Norman (atype of French) as the language of the upper classes. This is regarded as marking the end of the Old English era, since during the subsequent period the English language was heavily influenced by Anglo-Norman, developing into what is now known asMiddle English in England andEarly Scots in Scotland.
Old English is one of theWest Germanic languages, with its closest relatives beingOld Frisian andOld Saxon. Like other old Germanic languages, it is very different from Modern English and Modern Scots, and largely incomprehensible for Modern English or Modern Scots speakers without study.[3] WithinOld English grammar nouns, adjectives, pronouns and verbs have manyinflectional endings and forms, andword order is much freer.[2] The oldest Old English inscriptions were written using arunic system, but from about the 8th century this was replaced by aversion of the Latin alphabet.
Englisċ, from which the wordEnglish is derived, means 'pertaining to theAngles'.[4] The Angles were one of theGermanic tribes who settled in many parts of Britain in the 5th century.[5] By the 9th century, all speakers of Old English, including those who claimed Saxon or Jutish ancestry, could be referred to asEnglisċ.
This name probably either derives fromProto-Germanic*anguz, which referred to narrowness, constriction or anxiety, perhaps referring to shallow waters near the coast,[6] or else it may derive from a related word*angô which could refer to curve or hook shapes including fishing hooks.[7][8] Concerning the second option, it has been hypothesised that the Angles acquired their name either because they lived on a curved promontory of land shaped like afishhook, or else because they were fishermen (anglers).[9]
Old English was not static, and its usage covered a period of 700 years, from theAnglo-Saxon settlement of Britain in the 5th century to the late 11th century, some time after theNorman Conquest. While indicating that the establishment of dates is an arbitrary process, Albert Baugh dates Old English from 450 to 1150, a period of full inflections, asynthetic language.[2] Perhaps around 85% of Old English words are no longer in use, but those that survived are the basic elements ofModern English vocabulary.[2]
Alfred the Great statue inWinchester, Hampshire. The 9th-century English King proposed that primary education be taught in English, with those wishing to advance to holy orders to continue their studies in Latin.
With the unification of several of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms (outside theDanelaw) byAlfred the Great in the later 9th century, the language of government and literature became standardised around theWest Saxon dialect (Early West Saxon). Alfredadvocated education in English alongside Latin, and had many works translated into the English language; some of them, such asPope Gregory I's treatisePastoral Care, appear to have been translated by Alfred himself. In Old English, typical of the development of literature, poetry arose before prose, but Alfred chiefly inspired the growth of prose.[2]
A later literary standard, dating from the late 10th century, arose under the influence of BishopÆthelwold of Winchester, and was followed by such writers as the prolificÆlfric of Eynsham ("the Grammarian"). This form of the language is known as the "Winchester standard", or more commonly as Late West Saxon. It is considered to represent the "classical" form of Old English.[10] It retained its position of prestige until the time of the Norman Conquest, after which English ceased for a time to be of importance as a literary language.
The history of Old English can be subdivided into:
Early Old English (c. 650–900), the period of the oldest manuscript traditions, with authors such asCædmon,Bede,Cynewulf andAldhelm.
Late Old English (c. 900–1150), the final stage of the language leading up to the Norman conquest of England and the subsequent transition toEarly Middle English.[12]
Just asModern English is not monolithic, Old English varied according to place. Despite the diversity of language of the Germanic-speaking migrants who established Old English in England and southeastern Scotland, it is possible to reconstruct proto-Old English as a fairly unitary language. For the most part, the differences between the attested regional dialects of Old English developed within England and southeastern Scotland, rather than on the Mainland of Europe. Although from the tenth century Old English writing from all regions tended to conform to awritten standard based on Late West Saxon, in speech Old English continued to exhibit much local and regional variation, which remained in Middle English and to some extentModern English dialects.[13]
The four main dialectal forms of Old English wereMercian,Northumbrian,Kentish, andWest Saxon.[14] Mercian and Northumbrian are together referred to asAnglian. In terms of geography the Northumbrian region lay north of the Humber River; the Mercian lay north of theThames and south of the Humber River; West Saxon lay south and southwest of the Thames; and the smallest, Kentish region lay southeast of the Thames, a small corner of England. The Kentish region, settled by the Jutes from Jutland, has the scantest literary remains.[2] The termWest Saxon actually is represented by two different dialects: Early West Saxon and Late West Saxon. Hogg has suggested that these two dialects would be more appropriately namedAlfredian Saxon andÆthelwoldian Saxon, respectively, so that the naive reader would not assume that they are chronologically related.
Each of these four dialects was associated with an independent kingdom on the islands. Of these, Northumbria south of theTyne, and most ofMercia, wereoverrun by the Vikings during the 9th century. The portion of Mercia that was successfully defended, and all ofKent, were then integrated into Wessex underAlfred the Great.From that time on, the West Saxon dialect (then in the form now known as Early West Saxon) became standardised as the language of government, and as the basis for the many works of literature and religious materials produced or translated from Latin in that period.
The later literary standard known as Late West Saxon (see§ History), although centred in the same region of the country, appears not to have been directly descended from Alfred's Early West Saxon. For example, the formerdiphthong/iy/ tended to become monophthongised to/i/ in EWS, but to/y/ in LWS.[15]
Due to the centralisation of power and the destruction wrought by Viking invasions, there is relatively little written record of the non-West Saxon dialects after Alfred's unification. Some Mercian texts continued to be written, however, and the influence of Mercian is apparent in some of the translations produced under Alfred's programme, many of which were produced by Mercian scholars.[16] Other dialects certainly continued to be spoken, as is evidenced by the continued variation between their successors in Middle and Modern English. In fact, what would become the standard forms of Middle English and of Modern English are descended from Mercian rather than West Saxon, whileScots developed from the Northumbrian dialect.[citation needed] It was once claimed that, owing to its position at the heart of the Kingdom of Wessex, the relics of Anglo-Saxon accent, idiom and vocabulary were best preserved in thedialect of Somerset.[17]
Her sƿutelað seo gecƿydrædnes ðe ('Here the Word is revealed to thee'). Old English inscription over the arch of the southporticus in the 10th centurySt Mary's parish church, Breamore, Hampshire
The language of the Anglo-Saxon settlers appears not to have been significantly affected by the nativeBritish Celtic languages which itlargely displaced. The number of Celticloanwords introduced into the language is very small, although dialect and toponymic terms are more often retained in western language contact zones (Cumbria, Devon, Welsh Marches and Borders and so on) than in the east. However, various suggestions have been made concerning possible influence that Celtic may have had on developments in Englishsyntax in the post–Old English period, such as the regularprogressive construction andanalytic word order,[18] as well as the eventual development of theperiphrastic auxiliary verbdo. These ideas have generally not received widespread support from linguists, particularly as many of the theorisedBrittonicisms do not become widespread until the late Middle English and Early Modern English periods, in addition to the fact that similar forms exist in other modern Germanic languages.[19][20][21][22][23][24][25]
Old English contained a certain number of loanwords fromLatin, which was the scholarly and diplomaticlingua franca of Western Europe. It is sometimes possible to give approximate dates for the borrowing of individual Latin words based on which patterns of sound change they have undergone. Some Latin words had already been borrowed into the Germanic languages before the ancestralAngles andSaxons left continental Europe for Britain. More entered the language when the Anglo-Saxons wereconverted to Christianity and Latin-speaking priests became influential. It was also through Irish Christian missionaries that theLatin alphabet was introduced and adapted for thewriting of Old English, replacing the earlier runic system. Nonetheless, the largest transfer of Latin-based (mainlyOld French) words into English occurred in theMiddle English period.
Another source of loanwords wasOld Norse, which came into contact with Old English via the Scandinavian rulers and settlers in theDanelaw from the late 9th century, and during the rule ofCnut and other Danish kings in the early 11th century. Manyplace names in eastern and northern England are of Scandinavian origin. Norse borrowings are relatively rare in Old English literature, being mostly terms relating to government and administration. The literary standard, however, was based on theWest Saxon dialect, away from the main area of Scandinavian influence; the impact of Norse may have been greater in the eastern and northern dialects. Certainly in Middle English texts, which are more often based on eastern dialects, a strong Norse influence becomes apparent. Modern English contains many, often everyday, words that were borrowed from Old Norse, and the grammatical simplification that occurred after the Old English period is also often attributed to Norse influence.[2][26][27]
The influence of Old Norse certainly helped move English from asynthetic language along the continuum to a moreanalytic word order, andOld Norse most likely made a greater impact on the English language than any other language.[2][28] The eagerness ofVikings in the Danelaw to communicate with their Anglo-Saxon neighbours produced a friction that led to the erosion of the complicated inflectional word endings.[27][29][30] Simeon Potter notes:
No less far-reaching was the influence of Scandinavian upon the inflexional endings of English in hastening that wearing away and leveling of grammatical forms which gradually spread from north to south. It was, after all, a salutary influence. The gain was greater than the loss. There was a gain in directness, in clarity, and in strength.[31]
The strength of the Viking influence on Old English appears from the fact that the indispensable elements of the language – pronouns,modals,comparatives,pronominal adverbs (likehence andtogether),conjunctions andprepositions – show the most marked Danish influence; the best evidence of Scandinavian influence appears in the extensive word borrowings because, as Jespersen indicates, no texts exist in either Scandinavia or Northern England from this time to give certain evidence of an influence on syntax. The effect of Old Norse on Old English was substantive, pervasive, and of a democratic character.[2][27] Old Norse and Old English resembled each other closely like cousins, and with some words in common, speakers roughly understood each other;[27] in time the inflections melted away and the analytic pattern emerged.[30][32] It is most important to recognise that in many words the English and Scandinavian languages differed chiefly in their inflectional elements. The body of the word was so nearly the same in the two languages that only the endings would put obstacles in the way of mutual understanding. In the mixed population which existed in the Danelaw, these endings must have led to much confusion, tending gradually to become obscured and finally lost. This blending of peoples and languages resulted in "simplifying English grammar".[2]
The sounds enclosed in parentheses in the chart above are not considered to bephonemes:
[dʒ] is anallophone of/j/ occurring after/n/ and whengeminated (doubled).
[ŋ] is an allophone of/n/ occurring before [k] and [ɡ].
[v,ð,z] are voiced allophones of/f,θ,s/ respectively, occurring betweenvowels orvoiced consonants when the preceding sound was stressed.
[h,ç] are allophones of/x/ occurring at the beginning of a word or after a front vowel, respectively.
[ɡ] is an allophone of/ɣ/ occurring after/n/ or when doubled.[33][34] At some point before the Middle English period,[ɡ] also became the pronunciation word-initially.
The above system is largely similar tothat of Modern English, except that[ç,x,ɣ,l̥,n̥,r̥] (and[ʍ] formost speakers) have generally been lost, while the voiced affricate and fricatives (now also including/ʒ/) have become independent phonemes, as has/ŋ/.
Theopen back rounded vowel[ɒ] was an allophone of short /ɑ/ which occurred in stressed syllables before nasal consonants (/m/ and /n/). It was variously spelt either ⟨a⟩ or ⟨o⟩.
The Anglian dialects also had themid front rounded vowel/ø(ː)/, spelled ⟨oe⟩, which had emerged fromi-umlaut of/o(ː)/. In West Saxon and Kentish, it had already merged with/e(ː)/ before the first written prose.
Other dialects had different systems of diphthongs. For example, the Northumbrian dialect retained/i(ː)o̯/, which had merged with/e(ː)o̯/ in West Saxon.
Some of the principalsound changes occurring in the pre-history and history of Old English were the following:
Fronting of[ɑ(ː)] to[æ(ː)] except whennasalised or followed by anasal consonant ("Anglo-Frisian brightening"), partly reversed in certain positions by later "a-restoration" or retraction.
Monophthongisation of the diphthong[ai], and modification of remaining diphthongs to theheight-harmonic type.
Diphthongisation of long and short front vowels in certain positions ("breaking").
Palatalisation of velars[k],[ɡ],[ɣ],[sk] to[tʃ],[dʒ],[j],[ʃ] in certain front-vowel environments.
The process known asi-mutation (which for example led to modernmice as the plural ofmouse).
Loss of certain weak vowels in word-final and medial positions; reduction of remaining unstressed vowels.
Diphthongisation of certain vowels before certain consonants when preceding a back vowel ("back mutation").
Loss of/x/ between vowels or between a voiced consonant and a vowel, with lengthening of the preceding vowel.
Collapse of two consecutive vowels into a single vowel.
"Palatal umlaut", which has given forms such assix (compare Germansechs).
Nounsdecline for fivecases:nominative,accusative,genitive,dative,instrumental; threegenders: masculine, feminine, neuter; and twonumbers: singular, and plural; and are strong or weak. The instrumental is vestigial and only used with the masculine and neuter singular and often replaced by thedative. Onlypronouns and strong adjectives retain separateinstrumental forms. There is also sparse early Northumbrian evidence of a sixth case: thelocative. The evidence comes from NorthumbrianRunic texts (e.g.ᚩᚾ ᚱᚩᛞᛁon rodi 'on the Cross').[37]
Adjectives agree with nouns in case, gender, and number, and can be either strong or weak. Pronouns and sometimesparticiples agree in case, gender, and number. First-person and second-person pronouns occasionally distinguishdual-number forms. Thedefinite articlesē and itsinflections serve as adefinite article (the), ademonstrative adjective (that), anddemonstrative pronoun. Other demonstratives areþēs ("this"), andġeon ("that over there"). These words inflect for case, gender, and number. Adjectives have both strong and weak sets of endings, weak ones being used when a definite or possessivedeterminer is also present.
Verbsconjugate for threepersons: first, second, and third; two numbers: singular, plural; twotenses: present, and past; threemoods:indicative,subjunctive, andimperative;[38] and are strong (exhibiting ablaut) or weak (exhibiting a dental suffix). Verbs have twoinfinitive forms: bare and bound; and twoparticiples: present and past. The subjunctive has past and present forms. Finite verbs agree withsubjects in person and number. Thefuture tense,passive voice, and otheraspects are formed with compounds.Adpositions are mostly before but are often after their object. If theobject of an adposition is marked in the dative case, an adposition may conceivably be located anywhere in the sentence.
Remnants of the Old English case system in Modern English are in theforms of a few pronouns (such asI/me/mine,she/her,who/whom/whose) and in thepossessive ending-'s, which derives from the masculine and neuter genitive ending-es. The modernEnglish plural ending-(e)s derives from the Old English-as, but the latter applied only to "strong" masculine nouns in the nominative and accusative cases; different plural endings were used in other instances. Old English nouns hadgrammatical gender, while modern English has only natural gender. Pronoun usage could reflect either natural or grammatical gender when those conflicted, as in the case of the grammatically neuter (but naturally feminine) nounƿīf (/wiːf/), which meant "woman" (fromƿīfmann,lit.'woman person' or'female person') and became Modern Englishwife.
In Old English's verbal compound constructions are the beginnings of thecompound tenses of Modern English.[39] Old English verbs includestrong verbs, which form the past tense by altering the root vowel, andweak verbs, which use a suffix such as-de.[38] As in Modern English, and peculiar to the Germanic languages, the verbs formed two great classes: weak (regular), and strong (irregular). Like today, Old English had fewer strong verbs, and many of these have over time decayed into weak forms. Then, as now, dental suffixes indicated the past tense of the weak verbs, as inwork andworked.[2]
Old Englishsyntax is similar tothat of modern English. Some differences are consequences of the greater level of nominal and verbal inflection, allowing freerword order.
Nodo-support in questions and negatives. Questions were usually formed byinvertingsubject andfinite verb, and negatives by placingne before the finite verb, regardless of which verb.
Multiple negatives can stack up in a sentence intensifying each other (negative concord).
Sentences with subordinate clauses of the type "when X, Y" (e.g. "When I got home, I ate dinner") do not use awh-type conjunction, but rather ath-typecorrelative conjunction such asþā, otherwise meaning "then" (e.g.þā X, þā Y in place of "when X, Y"). Thewh-words (or "hw-words" in Old English's case) are used only asinterrogatives and asindefinite pronouns.
Similarly,wh-forms were not used asrelative pronouns; instead, the indeclinable wordþe is used, often preceded by (or replaced by) the appropriate form of the article/demonstrativese.
Old English was first written inrunes, using thefuthorc – a rune set derived from the Germanic 24-characterelder futhark, extended by five more runes used to represent Anglo-Saxon vowel sounds and sometimes by several more additional characters. From around the 8th century, the runic system came to be supplanted by a (minuscule)half-uncial script of theLatin alphabet introduced byIrish Christian missionaries.[41] This was replaced byInsular script, a cursive and pointed version of the half-uncial script. This was used until the end of the 12th century when continentalCarolingian minuscule (also known asCaroline) replaced the insular.
The Latin alphabet of the time still lacked the letters⟨j⟩ and⟨w⟩, and there was no⟨v⟩ as distinct from⟨u⟩; moreover native Old English spellings did not use⟨k⟩,⟨q⟩ or⟨z⟩. The remaining 20 Latin letters were supplemented by 4 more:⟨æ⟩ (æsc, modernash) and⟨ð⟩ (ðæt, now calledeth or edh), which were modified Latin letters, andthorn⟨þ⟩ andwynn⟨ƿ⟩, which are borrowings from the futhorc. A few letter pairs were used asdigraphs, representing a single sound. Also used was theTironian note⟨⁊⟩ (a character similar to the digit⟨7⟩) for theconjunctionand. A commonscribal abbreviation was athorn with a stroke⟨ꝥ⟩, which was used for the pronounþæt (that).Macrons over vowels were originally used not to mark long vowels (as in modern editions), but to indicate stress, or as abbreviations for a following⟨m⟩ or⟨n⟩.[42][43]
Modern editions of Old English manuscripts generally introduce some additional conventions. The modern forms of Latin letters are used, including⟨g⟩ instead ofinsularG,⟨s⟩ instead ofinsularS andlongS, and others which may differ considerably from the insular script, notably⟨e⟩,⟨f⟩ and⟨r⟩. Macrons are used to indicate long vowels, where usually no distinction was made between long and short vowels in the originals. (In some older editions anacute accent mark was used for consistency with Old Norse conventions.) Additionally, modern editions often distinguish betweenvelar andpalatal⟨c⟩ and⟨g⟩ by placing dots above the palatals:⟨ċ⟩,⟨ġ⟩. The letter wynn⟨ƿ⟩ is usually replaced with⟨w⟩, but⟨æ⟩,⟨ð⟩ and⟨þ⟩ are normally retained – except when⟨ð⟩ is replaced by⟨þ⟩.
In contrast with modernEnglish orthography, Old English spelling was reasonablyregular, with a mostly predictable correspondence between letters andphonemes. There were not usually anysilent letters – in the wordcniht, for example, both the⟨c⟩ and⟨h⟩ were pronounced (/knixt~kniçt/) unlike the⟨k⟩ and⟨gh⟩ in the modernknight (/naɪt/).
Spelling variations like⟨land⟩ ~⟨lond⟩ ("land") suggest the short vowel had a roundedallophone[ɒ] before/m/ and/n/ when it occurred in stressed syllables.
ā
/ɑː/
Modern editions use⟨ā⟩ to distinguish long/ɑː/ from short/ɑ/.
æ
æ
/æ/
Formerly thedigraph⟨ae⟩ was used;⟨æ⟩ became more common during the 8th century, and was standard after 800. Modern editions use⟨ǣ⟩ to distinguish long/æː/ from short/æ/.
ǣ
/æː/
ę
/æ/,/æː/
In 9th-century Kentish manuscripts, a form of⟨æ⟩ that was missing the upper hook of the⟨a⟩ part was used; it is not clear whether this represented/æ/ or/e/. The symbol⟨ę⟩ is used as a modern editorial substitution for the modified Kentish form of⟨æ⟩. Comparee caudata,⟨ę⟩.
b
/b/
[v] (an allophone of/f/)
Used in this way in early texts (before 800). For example, the wordsheaves is spelledscēabas in an early text, but later (and more commonly) asscēafas.
c
c
/k/
The/tʃ/ pronunciation is sometimes written with adiacritic by modern editors: most commonly⟨ċ⟩, sometimes⟨č⟩ or⟨ç⟩. Before a consonant letter the pronunciation is always/k/; word-finally after⟨i⟩ it is always/tʃ/. Otherwise, a knowledge of the history of the word is needed to predict the pronunciation with certainty, although it is most commonly/tʃ/ beforefront vowels (other than[y]) and/k/ elsewhere.
ċ
/tʃ/
cg
cg
[ɡɡ] (between vowels; rare), [ɡ] (after/n/)
Proto-Germanic *g was palatalized when it underwentWest Germanic gemination, resulting in the voiced palatal geminate[ddʒ] (which can be phonemically analyzed as/jj/). Consequently, the voiced velar geminate[ɡɡ] (which can be phonemically analyzed as/ɣɣ/) was rare in Old English, and its etymological origin in the words in which it occurs (such asfrocga 'frog') is unclear.[44] Alternative spellings of either geminate included⟨gg⟩,⟨gc⟩,⟨cgg⟩,⟨ccg⟩ and⟨gcg⟩.[45][46] The two geminates were not distinguished in Old English orthography; in modern editions, the palatal geminate is sometimes written⟨ċġ⟩ to distinguish it from velar⟨cg⟩.[47]
After/n/,/j/ was realized as[dʒ] and/ɣ/ was realized as[ɡ]. The spellings⟨ncg⟩,⟨ngc⟩ and even⟨ncgg⟩ were occasionally used instead of the usual⟨ng⟩.[48] The addition of⟨c⟩ to⟨g⟩ in spellings such as⟨cynincg⟩ and⟨cyningc⟩ for⟨cyning⟩ may have been a means of showing that the word was pronounced with a stop rather than a fricative; spellings with just⟨nc⟩ such as⟨cyninc⟩ are also found.[49] To disambiguate, the cluster ending in the palatal affricate is sometimes written⟨nċġ⟩ (or⟨nġċ⟩) by modern editors.[50]
ċġ
[ddʒ] (between vowels), [dʒ] (after/n/)
d
/d/
In the earliest texts it also represented/θ/. See⟨þ⟩.
ð
ð, þ
/θ/, including its allophone[ð]
Calledðæt in Old English; now calledeth oredh. Derived from theinsular form of⟨d⟩ with the addition of a cross-bar. Both⟨þ⟩ and⟨ð⟩ could represent either allophone of/θ/, voiceless[θ] or voiced[ð], but some texts show a tendency to use⟨þ⟩ at the start of words and⟨ð⟩ in the middle or at the end of a word.[51] Some modern editors replace⟨ð⟩ with⟨þ⟩ as a form of normalization and means of imposing consistency. See⟨þ⟩.
e
e
/e/
ē
/eː/
Modern editions use⟨ē⟩ to distinguish long/eː/ from short/e/.
ea
ea
/æɑ̯/
Sometimes stands for/ɑ/ after⟨ċ⟩ or⟨ġ⟩
ēa
/æːɑ̯/
Modern editions use⟨ēa⟩ to distinguish long/æːɑ̯/ from short/æɑ̯/. Sometimes stands for/ɑː/ after⟨ċ⟩ or⟨ġ⟩.
eo
eo
/eo̯/
Sometimes stands for/o/ after⟨ċ⟩ or⟨ġ⟩
ēo
/eːo̯/
Modern editions use⟨ēo⟩ to distinguish long/eːo̯/ from short/eo̯/.
f
/f/, including its allophone[v]
See also⟨b⟩.
g
g
/ɣ/, including its allophone[ɡ]
In Old English manuscripts, this letter usually took itsinsular form⟨ᵹ⟩. The[j] and[dʒ] pronunciations are sometimes written⟨ġ⟩ in modern editions. Word-initially before another consonant letter, the pronunciation is always the velar fricative[ɣ]. Word-finally after⟨i⟩, it is always palatal[j]. Otherwise, a knowledge of the history of the word in question is needed to predict the pronunciation with certainty, although it is most commonly/j/ before and afterfront vowels (other than[y]) and/ɣ/ elsewhere.
ġ
/j/, including its allophone[dʒ], which occurs after⟨n⟩
h
/x/, including its allophones[h,ç]
The combinations⟨hl⟩,⟨hr⟩,⟨hn⟩,⟨hw⟩ may have been realized as devoiced versions of the second consonants instead of as sequences starting with[h].
i
i
/i/, rarely[j]
Although the spelling⟨g⟩ is used for the palatal consonant/j/ from the earliest Old English texts, the letter⟨i⟩ is also found as a minority spelling of/j/. West Saxon scribes came to prefer to use⟨ri⟩ rather than⟨rg⟩ to spell the/rj/ sequence found in verbs likeherian andswerian, whereas Mercian and Northumbrian texts generally used⟨rg⟩ in the spelling of these words.[52]
ī
/iː/
Modern editions use⟨ī⟩ to distinguish long/iː/ from short/i/.
ie
ie
/iy̯/
īe
/iːy̯/
Modern editions use⟨īe⟩ to distinguish long/iːy̯/ from short/iy̯/.
io
io
/io̯/
By the time of the first written prose,/i(ː)o̯/ had merged with/e(ː)o̯/ in every dialect but Northumbrian, where it was preserved until Middle English. In Early West Saxon/e(ː)o̯/ was often written⟨io⟩ instead of⟨eo⟩, but by Late West Saxon only the⟨eo⟩ spelling remained common.
īo
/iːo̯/
Modern editions use⟨īo⟩ to distinguish long/iːo̯/ from short/io̯/.
k
/k/
Rarely used; this sound is normally represented by⟨c⟩.
l
/l/
Probablyvelarised[ɫ] (as in Modern English) when incoda position.
m
/m/
n
/n/, including its allophone[ŋ]
The allophone[ŋ] occurred before a velar plosive ([k] or[ɡ]).
o
o
/o/
See also⟨a⟩.
ō
/oː/
Modern editions use⟨ō⟩ to distinguish long/oː/ from short/o/.
oe
oe, œ
/ø/
Only occurs in some dialects. Written as⟨oe⟩ in Old English manuscripts, but some modern editions use the ligature⟨œ⟩ to indicate that it is a single vowel sound. Modern editions use⟨ōe⟩ or⟨œ̄⟩ to distinguish long/øː/ from short/ø/.
ōe, œ̄
/øː/
p
/p/
qu
/kw/
A rare spelling of/kw/, which was usually written as⟨cƿ⟩ (⟨cw⟩ in modern editions).
At the start of a word, the usual pronunciation is palatalizedsċ/ʃ/.
Between vowels in the middle of a word, the pronunciation can be either a palatalized geminate/ʃː/, as infisċere/ˈfiʃ.ʃe.re/ ('fisherman') andwȳsċan,/ˈwyːʃ.ʃɑn ('to wish'), or an unpalatalized consonant sequence/sk/, as ināscian/ˈɑːs.ki.ɑn/ ('to ask'). The pronunciation/sk/ occurs when⟨sc⟩ had been followed by a back vowel (/ɑ/,/o/,/u/) at the time of palatalization,[53] as illustrated by the contrast betweenfisċ/fiʃ/ ('fish') and its pluralfiscas/ˈfis.kɑs/. But due to changes over time, a knowledge of the history of the word in question is needed to predict the pronunciation with certainty.
In word-final position, the pronunciation ofsċ was either/ʃ/ or possibly/ʃː/ when the preceding vowel was short.[34]
sċ
/ʃː/ (between vowels), /ʃ/ (elsewhere)
t
/t/
th
/θ/
Represented/θ/ in the earliest texts (see⟨þ⟩)
þ
/θ/, including its allophone[ð]
Calledthorn and derived froma rune of the same name. In the earliest texts⟨d⟩ or⟨th⟩ was used for this phoneme, but these were later replaced in this function by eth⟨ð⟩ and thorn⟨þ⟩. Eth was first attested (in definitely dated materials) in the 7th century, and thorn in the 8th. Eth was more common than thorn before the time of Alfred. From then onward, thorn was used increasingly often at the start of words, while eth was normal in the middle and at the end of words, although usage varied in both cases. Some modern editions use only thorn.
u
u
/u/, also sometimes/w/. See⟨ƿ⟩.
ū
/uː/
Modern editions use⟨ū⟩ to distinguish long/uː/ from short/u/.
uu
w
/w/
Old English manuscripts typically represented the sound/w/ with the letter⟨ƿ⟩, calledwynn and derived from the rune of the same name. In earlier texts by continental scribes, and also later in the north,/w/ was represented by⟨u⟩ or⟨uu⟩. In modern editions, wynn is replaced by⟨w⟩, to prevent confusion with⟨p⟩.
ƿ
x
/ks/
y
y
/y/
ȳ
/yː/
Modern editions use⟨ȳ⟩ to distinguish long/yː/ from short/y/.
z
/ts/
A rare spelling for/ts/; e.g.betst ('best') is occasionally speltbezt.
Doubled consonants aregeminated; the geminate fricatives⟨ff⟩,⟨ss⟩ and⟨ðð⟩/⟨þþ⟩/⟨ðþ⟩/⟨þð⟩ are always voiceless[ff],[ss],[θθ].
The first page of theBeowulf manuscript with its opening Hƿæt ƿē Gārde/na ingēar dagum þēod cyninga / þrym ge frunon... "Listen! We of the Spear-Danes from days of yore have heard of the glory of the nation-kings..."
The corpus of Old English literature is small but still significant, with some 400 surviving manuscripts.[54] The pagan and Christian streams mingle in Old English, one of the richest and most significant bodies of literature preserved among the early Germanic peoples.[2] In his supplementary article to the 1935 posthumous edition of Bright'sAnglo-Saxon Reader, James Hulbert writes:
In such historical conditions, an incalculable amount of the writings of the Anglo-Saxon period perished. What they contained, how important they were for an understanding of literature before the Conquest, we have no means of knowing: the scant catalogues of monastic libraries do not help us, and there are no references in extant works to other compositions....How incomplete our materials are can be illustrated by the well-known fact that, with few and relatively unimportant exceptions, all extant Anglo-Saxon poetry is preserved in four manuscripts.
Some of the most important surviving works of Old English literature areBeowulf, anepic poem; theAnglo-Saxon Chronicle, a record of early English history; theFranks Casket, an inscribed early whalebone artefact; andCædmon's Hymn, a Christian religious poem. There are also a number of extant prose works, such as sermons and saints' lives, biblical translations, and translated Latin works of the early Church Fathers, legal documents, such as laws and wills, and practical works on grammar, medicine, and geography. Still, poetry is considered the heart of Old English literature. Nearly all Anglo-Saxon authors are anonymous, with a few exceptions, such asBede andCædmon. Cædmon, the earliest English poet known by name, served as a lay brother in the monastery at Whitby.[2]
The first example is taken from the opening lines ofBeowulf, a work with around 3,000 lines.[2] This passage describes howHrothgar's legendary ancestorScyld was found as a baby, washed ashore, and adopted by a noble family. The translation is literal and represents the original poetic word order. As such, it is not typical of Old English prose. The modern cognates of original words have been used whenever practical to give a close approximation of the feel of the original poem.
The words in brackets are implied in the Old English by noun case and the bold words in brackets are explanations of words that have slightly different meanings in a modern context.What is used by the poet where a word likelo orbehold would be expected. This usage is similar towhat-ho!, both an expression of surprise and a call to attention.
English poetry is based on stress and alliteration. In alliteration, the first consonant in a word alliterates with the same consonant at the beginning of another word, as withGār-Dena andġeār-dagum. Vowels alliterate with any other vowel, as withæþelingas andellen. In the text below, the letters that alliterate are bolded.
[and] yeme(heed/obedience; related to "gormless") yield. That was [a] good king!
Here is a natural enough Modern English translation, although the phrasing of the Old English passage has often been stylistically preserved, even though it is not usual in Modern English:
What! We Spear-Danes in ancient days inquired about the glory of the kings of the nation, how the princes performed bravery.
Often, Shield, the son of Sheaf, ripped away the meadbenchesfrom many tribes' enemy bands — he terrified men!
After destitution was first experienced (by him), he met with consolation for that; he grew under the clouds of the sky and flourished in adulation, until all of the neighbouring people had to obey him over the whaleroad, and pay tribute to the man. That was a good king!
This is a proclamation fromCnut to his earlThorkell the Tall and the English people written in AD 1019. Unlike the previous two examples, this text is prose rather than poetry. For ease of reading, the passage has been divided into sentences while thepilcrows represent the original division.
Original
Representation with constructed cognates
¶Cnut cyning gret his arcebiscopas and his leod-biscopas and Þurcyl eorl and ealle his eorlas and ealne his þeodscype, tƿelfhynde and tƿyhynde, gehadode and læƿede, on Englalande freondlice.
¶ Cnut, king, greets his archbishops and his lede'(people's)'-bishops and Thorkell, earl, and all his earls and all hispeopleship,greater(having a 1200shillingweregild) andlesser(200 shilling weregild), hooded(ordained to priesthood) and lewd(lay), in England friendly.
And ic cyðe eoƿ, þæt ic ƿylle beon hold hlaford and unsƿicende to godes gerihtum and to rihtre ƿoroldlage.
And I kithe(make known/couth to) you, that I will be [a] hold(civilised) lord and unswiking(uncheating) to God's rights(laws) and to [the] rights(laws) worldly.
¶Ic nam me to gemynde þa geƿritu and þa ƿord, þe se arcebiscop Lyfing me fram þam papan brohte of Rome, þæt ic scolde æghƿær godes lof upp aræran and unriht alecgan and full frið ƿyrcean be ðære mihte, þe me god syllan ƿolde.
¶ I nam(took) me to mind the writs and the word that theArchbishop Lyfing me from the Pope brought of Rome, that I should ayewhere(everywhere) God's love(praise) uprear(promote), and unright(outlaw) lies, and full frith(peace) work(bring about) by the might that me God would(wished) [to] sell'(give).
¶Nu ne ƿandode ic na minum sceattum, þa hƿile þe eoƿ unfrið on handa stod: nu ic mid-godes fultume þæt totƿæmde mid-minum scattum.
¶ Now, ne went(withdrew/changed) I not my shot(financial contribution, cf. Norse cognate in scot-free) the while that you stood(endured) unfrith(turmoil) on-hand: now I, mid(with) God'ssupport, that [unfrith] totwemed(separated/dispelled) mid(with) my shot(financial contribution).
Þa cydde man me, þæt us mara hearm to fundode, þonne us ƿel licode: and þa for ic me sylf mid-þam mannum þe me mid-foron into Denmearcon, þe eoƿ mæst hearm of com: and þæt hæbbe mid-godes fultume forene forfangen, þæt eoƿ næfre heonon forð þanon nan unfrið to ne cymð, þa hƿile þe ge me rihtlice healdað and min lif byð.
Tho(then) [a] man kithed(made known/couth to) me that us more harmhad found(come upon) than us well liked(equalled): and tho(then) fore(travelled) I, meself, mid(with) those men that mid(with) me fore(travelled), into Denmark that [to] you most harm came of(from): and that[harm] have [I], mid(with) God'ssupport, afore(previously) forefangen(forestalled) that to you never henceforth thence none unfrith(breach of peace) ne come the while that ye me rightly hold(behold as king) and my life beeth.
The following is a natural Modern English translation, with the overall structure of the Old English passage preserved. Even though "earl" is used to translate its Old English cognate "eorl", "eorl" in Old English does not correspond exactly to "earl" of the later medieval period:
King Cnut kindly greets his archbishops and his provincial bishops and Earl Thorkell, and all his earls, and all his people, both those with a weregild of 1,200 shillings and those with a weregild of 200 shillings, both ordained and layman, in England.
And I declare to you, that I will be a kind lord, and faithful to God's laws and to proper secular law.
I recalled the writings and words which the archbishop Lyfing brought to me from the Pope of Rome, that I must promote the worship of God everywhere, and suppress unrighteousness, and promote perfect peace with the power which God would give me.
I never hesitated from my peace payments (e.g. to the Vikings) while you had strife at hand. But with God's help and my payments, that went away.
At that time, I was told that we had been harmed more than we liked; and I departed with the men who accompanied me into Denmark, from where the most harm has come to you; and I have already prevented it with God's help, so that from now on, strife will never come to you from there, while you regard me rightly and my life persists.
The earliest history of Old Englishlexicography lies in the Anglo-Saxon period itself, when English-speaking scholars created Englishglosses on Latin texts. At first, these were oftenmarginal orinterlinear glosses; however, they soon came to be gathered into word-lists such as theÉpinal-Erfurt,Leiden andCorpus Glossaries. Over time, these word-lists were consolidated and alphabetised to create extensive Latin–Old English glossaries with some of the character of dictionaries, such as theCleopatra Glossaries, theHarley Glossary and theBrussels Glossary.[55] In some cases, the material in these glossaries continued to be circulated and updated inMiddle English glossaries, such as theDurham Plant-Name Glossary and theLaud Herbal Glossary.[56]
Old English lexicography was revived in the early modern period, drawing heavily on Anglo-Saxons' own glossaries. The major publication at this time wasWilliam Somner'sDictionarium Saxonico-Latino-Anglicum.[57] The next substantial Old English dictionary wasJoseph Bosworth'sAnglo-Saxon Dictionary of 1838.
In modern scholarship, the following dictionaries remain current:
Cameron, Angus, et al. (ed.) (1983–).Dictionary of Old English. Toronto: Published for the Dictionary of Old English Project, Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto by the Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies. Initially issued on microfiche and subsequently as a CD-ROM, the dictionary is now primarily published online athttps://www.doe.utoronto.ca. This generally supersedes previous dictionaries where available. As of September 2018, the dictionary covered A-I.
Bosworth, Joseph andT. Northcote Toller. (1898).An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon. The main research dictionary for Old English, unless superseded by theDictionary of Old English. Various digitisations are available open-access, including athttp://bosworth.ff.cuni.cz/. Due to errors and omissions in the 1898 publication, this needs to be read in conjunction with:
T. Northcote Toller. (1921).An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary: Supplement. Oxford: Clarendon.
Clark Hall, J. R. (1969).A Concise Anglo-Saxon Dictionary. 4th rev. edn by Herbet D. Meritt. Cambridge University Press. Occasionally more accurate than Bosworth-Toller, and widely used as a reading dictionary. Various digitisations are available, includinghere.
Roberts, Jane andChristian Kay, with Lynne Grundy,A Thesaurus of Old English in Two Volumes, Costerus New Series, 131–32, 2nd rev. impression, 2 vols (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2000), also availableonline. A thesaurus based on the definitions in Bosworth-Toller and the structure ofRoget's Thesaurus.
Like other historical languages, Old English has been used by scholars and enthusiasts of later periods to create texts either imitating Old English literature or deliberately transferring it to a different cultural context. Examples includeAlistair Campbell andJ. R. R. Tolkien.[58]Ransom Riggs uses several Old English words, such as syndrigast (singular, peculiar), ymbryne (period, cycle), etc., dubbed as "Old Peculiar" ones. Advocates oflinguistic purism in English often look to older forms of English, including Old English, as a means of either reviving old words or coining new ones.
A number of websites devoted toModern Paganism andhistorical reenactment offer reference material and forums promoting the active use of Old English. There is also anOld English version of Wikipedia. However, one investigation found that many Neo-Old English texts published online bear little resemblance to the historical language and have many basic grammatical mistakes.[59][60]
^By the 16th century the termAnglo-Saxon came to refer to all things of the early English period, including language, culture, and people. While it remains the normal term for the latter two aspects, the language began to be called Old English towards the end of the 19th century, as a result of the increasingly strong anti-German nationalism in English society of the 1890s and early 1900s. However, many authors still also use the term Anglo-Saxon to refer to the language. Crystal, David (2003).The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language. Cambridge University Press.ISBN0-521-53033-4.
^abcdefghijklmnoBaugh, Albert (1951).A History of the English Language. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. pp. 60–83, 110–130 (Scandinavian influence).
^Fennell, Barbara 1998.A history of English. A sociolinguistic approach. Oxford: Blackwell.
^Pyles, Thomas and John Algeo 1993.Origins and development of the English language. 4th edition. (New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich).
^Barber, Charles, Joan C. Beal and Philip A. Shaw 2009.The English language. A historical introduction. Second edition of Barber (1993). Cambridge University Press.
^Mugglestone, Lynda (ed.) 2006.The Oxford History of English. Oxford University Press.
^Hogg, Richard M. and David Denison (ed.) 2006.A history of the English language. Cambridge University Press.
^Baugh, Albert C. and Thomas Cable 1993A history of the English language. 4th edition. (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall).
^Stumpf, John (1970).An Outline of English Literature; Anglo-Saxon and Middle English Literature. London: Forum House Publishing Company. p. 7.We do not know what languages the Jutes, Angles, and Saxons spoke, nor even whether they were sufficiently similar to make them mutually intelligible, but it is reasonable to assume that by the end of the sixth century there must have been a language that could be understood by all and this we call Primitive Old English.
^Alexiadou, Artemis (2008),Nominal vs. Verbal -ing Constructions and the Development of the English Progressive
^Robert McColl Millar, "English in the 'transition period': the sources of contact-induced change", inContact: The Interaction of Closely-Related Linguistic Varieties and the History of English, Edinburgh University Press (2016)
^Flom, George T. (1915). Flom, George T. (ed.). "On the Earliest History of the Latin Script in Eastern Norway".Publications of the Society for the Advancement of Scandinavian Study.2 (2): 94.JSTOR40914943.
^Ker, N. R. (1957).Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon. Oxford: Clarendon.
^Patrizia Lendinara, 'Anglo-Saxon Glosses and Glossaries: An Introduction', in Anglo-Saxon Glosses and Glossaries (Aldershot: Variorum, 1999), pp. 1–26.
^Das Durhamer Pflanzenglossar: lateinisch und altenglish, ed. by Bogislav von Lindheim, Beiträge zur englischen Philologie, 35 (Bochum-Langendreer: Poppinghaus, 1941).
^William Somner,Dictionarium Saxonico-Latino-Anglicum, English Linguistics 1500–1800 (A Collection of Facsimile Reprints), 247 (Menston: The Scholar Press, 1970).
^Robinson, Fred C. 'The Afterlife of Old English'.The Tomb of Beowulf and Other Essays on Old English. Oxford: Blackwell, 1993. pp. 275–303.
^Christina Neuland and Florian Schleburg. (2014). "A New Old English? The Chances of an Anglo-Saxon Revival on the Internet". In: S. Buschfeld et al. (Eds.),The Evolution of Englishes. The Dynamic Model and Beyond, pp. 486–504. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Baugh, Albert C.; & Cable, Thomas. (1993).A History of the English Language (4th ed.). London: Routledge.
Blake, Norman (1992).The Cambridge History of the English Language: Vol. 2. Cambridge University Press.
Campbell, A. (1959).Old English Grammar. Oxford: Clarendon.
Earle, John (2005).A Book for the Beginner in Anglo-Saxon. Bristol, PA: Evolution.ISBN1-889758-69-8. (Reissue of one of 4 eds. 1877–1902)
Euler, Wolfram (2013).Das Westgermanische: von der Herausbildung im 3. bis zur Aufgliederung im 7. Jahrhundert; Analyse und Rekonstruktion [West Germanic: from its Emergence in the 3rd up until its Dissolution in the 7th century CE: Analyses and Reconstruction]. 244 p., in German with English summary, London/Berlin 2013,ISBN978-3-9812110-7-8.
Fulk, R. D. (2014).An introductory grammar of Old English with an anthology of readings. Tempe, Arizona: ACMRS Press.ISBN978-0-86698-514-7.
Hogg, Richard M. (ed.). (1992).The Cambridge History of the English Language: (Vol 1): the Beginnings to 1066. Cambridge University Press.
Hogg, Richard; & Denison, David (eds.) (2006)A History of the English Language. Cambridge University Press.
Jespersen, Otto (1909–1949)A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. 7 vols. Heidelberg: C. Winter & Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard
Ker, N. R. (1957).A Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon. Oxford: Clarendon.
Ker, N. R. (1990) [1957].A Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon; with supplement prepared by Neil Ker originally published in.Anglo-Saxon England; 5, 1957. Oxford: ClarendonISBN0-19-811251-3
Scragg, Donald G. (1974).A History of English Spelling. Manchester University Press.
Shaw, Philip A. (2012). "Coins As Evidence".The Oxford Handbook of the History of English, Chapter 3, pp. 50–52. Edited by Terttu Nevalainen and Elizabeth Closs Traugott.
Wełna, Jerzy (1986). "The Old English Digraph⟨cg⟩ Again".Linguistics across Historical and Geographical Boundaries: Vol 1: Linguistic Theory and Historical Linguistics, pp. 753–762. Edited by Dieter Kastovsky and Aleksander Szwedek.
Anderson, John M.; & Jones, Charles. (1977).Phonological structure and the history of English. North-Holland linguistics series (No. 33). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Brunner, Karl. (1965).Altenglische Grammatik (nach der angelsächsischen Grammatik von Eduard Sievers neubearbeitet) (3rd ed.). Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.
Campbell, A. (1959).Old English Grammar. Oxford: Clarendon.
Cercignani, Fausto (1983). "The Development of */k/ and */sk/ in Old English".Journal of English and Germanic Philology, 82 (3): 313–323.
Girvan, Ritchie. (1931).Angelsaksisch Handboek; E. L. Deuschle (transl.). (Oudgermaansche Handboeken; No. 4). Haarlem: Tjeenk Willink.
Halle, Morris; & Keyser, Samuel J. (1971).English Stress: its form, its growth, and its role in verse. New York: Harper & Row.
Hockett, Charles F. (1959). "The stressed syllabics of Old English".Language.35 (4):575–597.doi:10.2307/410597.JSTOR410597.
Kuhn, Sherman M. (1961). "On the Syllabic Phonemes of Old English".Language.37 (4):522–538.doi:10.2307/411354.JSTOR411354.
Kuhn, Sherman M. (1970). "On the consonantal phonemes of Old English". In: J. L. Rosier (ed.)Philological Essays: studies in Old and Middle English language and literature in honour of Herbert Dean Merritt (pp. 16–49). The Hague: Mouton.
Lass, Roger; & Anderson, John M. (1975).Old English Phonology. (Cambridge studies in linguistics; No. 14). Cambridge University Press.
Luick, Karl. (1914–1940).Historische Grammatik der englischen Sprache. Stuttgart:Bernhard Tauchnitz.
Maling, J. (1971). "Sentence stress in Old English".Linguistic Inquiry.2 (3):379–400.JSTOR4177642.
McCully, C. B.; Hogg, Richard M. (1990). "An account of Old English stress".Journal of Linguistics.26 (2):315–339.doi:10.1017/S0022226700014699 (inactive 6 April 2025).S2CID144915239.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: DOI inactive as of April 2025 (link)
Minkova, Donka (2014).A Historical Phonology of English. Edinburgh University Press.
Moulton, W. G. (1972). "The Proto-Germanic non-syllabics (consonants)". In:F. van Coetsem & H. L. Kufner (Eds.),Toward a Grammar of Proto-Germanic (pp. 141–173). Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.
Sievers, Eduard (1893).Altgermanische Metrik. Halle: Max Niemeyer.
Wagner, Karl Heinz (1969).Generative Grammatical Studies in the Old English language. Heidelberg: Julius Groos.
Brunner, Karl. (1962).Die englische Sprache: ihre geschichtliche Entwicklung (Vol. II). Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.
Kemenade, Ans van. (1982).Syntactic Case and Morphological Case in the History of English. Dordrecht: Foris.
MacLaughlin, John C. (1983).Old English Syntax: a handbook. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.
Mitchell, Bruce. (1985).Old English Syntax (Vols. 1–2). Oxford: Clarendon (no more published)
Vol. 1: Concord, the parts of speech and the sentence
Vol. 2: Subordination, independent elements, and element order
Mitchell, Bruce. (1990)A Critical Bibliography of Old English Syntax to the end of 1984, including addenda and corrigenda to "Old English Syntax". Oxford: Blackwell
Timofeeva, Olga. (2010)Non-finite Constructions in Old English, with Special Reference to Syntactic Borrowing from Latin, PhD dissertation, Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki, vol. LXXX, Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. (1972).A History of English Syntax: a transformational approach to the history of English sentence structure. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Visser, F. Th. (1963–1973).An Historical Syntax of the English Language (Vols. 1–3). Leiden: Brill.
Bosworth, J.; & Toller, T. Northcote. (1898).An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon. (Based on Bosworth's 1838 dictionary, his papers & additions by Toller)
Toller, T. Northcote. (1921).An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary: Supplement. Oxford: Clarendon.
Campbell, A. (1972).An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary: Enlarged addenda and corrigenda. Oxford: Clarendon.
Clark Hall, J. R.; & Merritt, H. D. (1969).A Concise Anglo-Saxon Dictionary (4th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Cameron, Angus, et al. (ed.) (1983)Dictionary of Old English. Toronto: Published for the Dictionary of Old English Project, Centre for Medieval Studies, University of Toronto by the Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1983/1994. (Issued on microfiche and subsequently as a CD-ROM and on theWorld Wide Web.)
