Why "worser" is better: The double comparative in 16th and 17th century English




Faculty/Professorship: English and Historical Linguistics  
Author(s): Schlüter, Julia  
Publisher Information: Bamberg : opus
Year of publication: 2014
Pages: 193-208 ; Illustrationen
Source/Other editions: Ursprünglich in: Language Variation and Change. - 13 (2001), 2, S. 193 - 208. Copyright: Cambridge University Press. Available at http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=LVC.
is version of: 10.1017/s0954394501132047
Year of first publication: 2001
Language(s): English
Licence: German Act on Copyright 
URN: urn:nbn:de:bvb:473-opus4-68360
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: 420 English  
RVK Classification: HF 450   
Type: Article
URI: https://fis.uni-bamberg.de/handle/uniba/3084
Year of publication: 27. June 2014

File SizeFormat  
SchlueterLVCWhyWIBseA2.pdf472.45 kBPDFView/Open