[lit-ideas] Re: comparative shenanigans
- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 08:22:49 EST
Hi Julie, Thanks for the query. I'm not sure, myself, so I'm pasting the
entries in the OED, the relevant sections on 'historical grammar' for both
suffix -er and 'more' as applied to adj.
Hope it helps, and don't focus too much on the Middle High German
forms! :-)
JLS
Re: suffix -er. In adjs. Middle English -er, -ere (-ore, -ure),
-re, Old English -ra (fem., neut. -re) represents two different suffixes used
in Old Teut. to form the compar., viz.: (a) -izon- (Goth. -iza, OHG., OS.
-iro, ON. -ri with umlaut), and (b) -ôzon- (Goth. -ôza, OHG. -ôro, ON. -ari).
These OTeut. suffixes are f. the adverbial -iz, -ôz. In OE. only a few
comparatives retained the umlaut which phonetic law requires in the (a) type.
In
mod.Eng. no forms with umlaut remain, except better, elder (OE. tera, ldra),
the comparatives being ordinarily formed by adding -er to the positive. The ‘
irregular comparatives’ worse (OE. wiersa = Goth. wairsiza) and less (OE.
ssa)
contain the (a) suffix in a disguised form, and the analogy of other
comparatives has given rise to the extended forms worser and lesser. In
mod.Eng. the
comparatives in -er are almost restricted to adjs. of one or two syllables.
Longer adjs., and also disyllables containing any suffix other than -y or
-ly, having the periphrastic comparison by means of the adv. "more" Earlier
writers, however, have beautifuller, eminenter, slavisher, etc.. A few modern
writers, e.g. Carlyle, affect the same method. The periphrastic form is
admissible (esp. in predicative use) for all adjs., even monosyllables, which
are
not extremely common colloquially. In hinder, inner, the comparative
suffix, though in WGer. and ON. formally coincident with that treated above,
is
quite distinct in origin, repr. OTeut. -eron-, f. OAryan -ero-. In adverbs.
The
OE. form of the comparative suffix was -or, corresp. to OS., OHG. -ôr, Goth.
-ôs:OTeut. -ôz. OTeut. had also a suffix -iz with the same function,
corresponding to L. -is in magis, nimis, and cogn. with L. -ior of adjs.; it
is
represented by Goth. -is, ON. -r with umlaut; in OE. by the umlaut in
monosyllabic comparatives like ng:*langiz longer, t:*batiz better, which died
out in
early ME., being superseded by the adj. forms. The relation between the two
OTeut. suffixes is much disputed: a widely-held hypothesis is that -ôz is f.
-ô
adverbial suffix + -iz. The advbs. which take -er in the comparative are
chiefly those which are now identical in form with adjs. (either repr. OE.
advbs.
in -e, or modern adverbial uses of the adj.): e.g. ‘to work harder’, ‘to
stand closer’. Exceptional instances are oftener, seldomer, sooner. The advbs.
in -LY are now compared periphrastically with more, though in earlier writers
the inflexional comparison is common, e.g. easilier = more easily, ME.
entierlocure = more entirely; in poetry it still occurs, as in keenlier
(Tennyson).
Re: the "more" construction, it is cognate with Old Frisian ra,
Middle Dutch re (Dutch has the double comparative meerder), Old Saxon ro
(Middle Low German r, also re, ), Old High German ra, ro (German (arch.) mehr-
in
mehres, neuter, mehre, plural; cf. German mehrere (plural) several), Old
Icelandic meiri, Norn (Shetland) mire, mere (also adverb mire), Swedish mera,
Danish mere (the Swedish and Danish forms are the neuter adjective used
adverbially), Gothic maiza < an adjectival base parallel to the adverbial base
of MO
adv.1 Cf. the following adverbial forms in West Germanic languages, either
influenced by or secondary developments from the adjectival forms: Old
Frisian r, r, Dutch meer, Old Saxon r (Middle Low German r, re), German mehr).
Use
of the neuter adjective as noun and as adverb is rare in Old English, as
(see MO adv.1 and discussion s.v.) was usual in both applications. The
construction expresses the comparative degree corresponding to modern English
great, much, and many respectively. The other constructions should be compared
with
earlier MO a.1 1, MO. The adverbial use with an adjective or adverb
developed into the form of the comparative. With most adjectives and adverbs
of more
than one syllable, and with all those of more than two syllables, this is
the normal mode of forming the comparative. A few monosyllables (e.g. real,
right, wrong, just) normally form their comparatives in this way instead of
taking the suffix -er. [Traces of periphrastic comparison are found in Old
English in the use of ma, bet, and <NOor with participles and occas. with
adjectives. Periphrastic comparison of adjectives and adverbs with more (and
for the
superlative most: see MOST adv.) is found from early Middle English, although
only sporadically before the 14th cent. Unlike modern usage, in Middle
English periphrastic comparison is more common with monosyllabic or disyllabic
adjectives than with adjectives of three or more syllables, although it is
less
common than comparison with -er (or -most) for adjectives of any length in
Middle English; the development of the modern distribution is illustrated by
the frequency with which formation of the comparison of adjectives with three
or more syllables with -er rather than with more is criticized in 18th-cent.
and later normative grammars. It is uncertain to what extent the emergence
of periphrastic comparison in English was influenced by analogy with French
comparison with plus and le plus or Latin comparison with magis and maxime;
confusion between and subsequent identity of form of MOST a. and superlatives
in -MOST may also have aided the process. Modifying monosyllabic and
disyllabic adjectives and adverbs which have otherwise an inflected comparative
in
-er, e.g. busy, high, slow, true. This form is often now used either for
special emphasis or clearness, or to preserve a balance of phrase with other
comparatives with ‘more’, or to modify the whole predicate rather than the
single adjective or adverb, esp. when followed by than.
J. L. Speranza,
Buenos Aires, Argentina.
**************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest
products.
(http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] Re: comparative shenanigans