Options
Why "worser" is better: The double comparative in 16th and 17th century English
Schlüter, Julia (2001): Why „worser“ is better: The double comparative in 16th and 17th century English, in: Language Variation and Change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Jg. 13, Nr. 2, S. 193–208, doi: 10.1017/s0954394501132047.
Author:
Title of the Journal:
Language Variation and Change
ISSN:
0954-3945
1469-8021
Publisher Information:
Year of publication:
2001
Volume:
13
Issue:
2
Pages:
Language:
English
Abstract:
In Early Modern English, double comparatives were often encountered in both spoken and written language. The present article investigates the redundantly marked comparative "worser" in relation to its irregular, but etymologically justified, counterpart "worse". My aim is to examine the diachronic development of the form as well as its distribution in the written language of the 16th and 17th centuries. Two detailed corpus studies are used to reveal the set of parameters underlying the variation between "worse" and "worser", which include system congruity, semantics, and standardization effects. However, the focus here is on the tendency to maintain an alternation of stressed and unstressed syllables, known as the Principle of Rhythmic Alternation. This prosodic principle (which has been argued to be particularly influential in English) turns out to be responsible for most of the results obtained in the analysis of the corpus data.
GND Keywords: ;
Frühneuenglisch
Prosodie
Keywords: ; ; ; ;
worse
worser
rhythmic alternation
Early Modern English
double comparative
DDC Classification:
RVK Classification:
Peer Reviewed:
Yes:
International Distribution:
Yes:
Type:
Article
Activation date:
March 18, 2021
Versioning
Question on publication
Permalink
https://fis.uni-bamberg.de/handle/uniba/49672