Modelling Analogical Change:
A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution
Oscar Strik
(0304794)
MA Thesis
Research MA Linguistics
Universiteit van Amsterdam
Final Version – August 22nd 2009
Supervisors:
Dr. H.C.B. Perridon
Prof. Dr. O.C.M. Fischer
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
Table of Contents
1. Introduction....................................................................................................................................4
1.1 Research aims............................................................................................................................5
2. Strong verbs....................................................................................................................................7
2.1 Origin of the strong verbs .........................................................................................................7
2.2 Ablaut.........................................................................................................................................8
2.3 Strong and weak as categories.................................................................................................10
3. Analogy..........................................................................................................................................12
3.1 Analogy as a cognitive concept...............................................................................................12
3.2 Analogy in linguistics..............................................................................................................14
3.3 Analogical language change....................................................................................................15
3.4 Theories on irregular verb morphology...................................................................................18
3.5 Modelling analogy in linguistics..............................................................................................20
4. Morphological change in strong verbs........................................................................................24
4.1 Vowel alternation change.........................................................................................................24
4.2 Weakening................................................................................................................................25
4.3 Strengthening...........................................................................................................................26
4.4 Verb stem reinterpretation........................................................................................................26
4.5 Interparadigmatic and Intraparadigmatic change....................................................................27
5. Modelling analogical change in Middle Frisian.........................................................................30
5.1 The Middle Frisian verb system..............................................................................................31
5.2 Report of the research..............................................................................................................33
5.2.1 Introduction of the research and dataset...............................................................................33
5.2.2 Synchronic modelling of the Middle Frisian strong verbs...................................................39
5.2.2.1 Preterite singular................................................................................................................39
5.2.2.2 Preterite plural....................................................................................................................43
5.2.2.3 Preterite participle..............................................................................................................44
5.2.2.4 Preliminary conclusions.....................................................................................................45
5.2.3 Diachronic modelling of interparadigmatic strong verb changes between Middle Frisian
2 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
and Early Modern Frisian..............................................................................................................47
6. Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................52
List of References and Used Literature..........................................................................................55
Appendix 1: Middle Frisian Dataset...............................................................................................58
Appendix 2: Middle Frisian to Early Modern Frisian Test set....................................................65
3 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
1. Introduction1
Why do we write wrote instead of writed? What's wrong with singed instead of sang and sung? And
why have some people brought and bought, while others have brung,2 but not *bung?
These divergent and often difficult to predict forms are one of the most remarkable and
interesting phenomena in the verb system of English and the other Germanic languages. They are
the hallmark of the so-called strong verbs, a small set of irregular but generally quite frequent verbs.
The questions that might spring to mind first when considering these verbs are 'where did they
come from to begin with?' And 'wouldn't it be simpler if they were all just regular?' My answer to
the second question would be 'yes, perhaps.' But we are stuck with the strong verbs; we have been
since the Germanic language split off from its Indo-European parent language, and will likely be
stuck with them for quite a while yet. The fact is, we 3 learned them along with the rest of the
language, as did our parents, etc. all the way back to the point where these verbs first entered the
language. That we can remember and use irregular forms such as the strong verbs is plain enough,
though at the same time quite interesting. Perhaps even more fascinating is how these forms change
over time.
These changes come in different varieties. What we see quite often is that strong verbs seem
to 'give up', and switch over to a weak inflection. An example would be the English verb chew,
which was still a strong verb in Old English, but became weak in Middle English. Others merely
change the way in which they are strong, but remain irregular all the same, such as English burst –
burst – burst, from Old Eng. berstan – bærst – burston – borsten.4 Still others used to be weak, but
for some reason became strong after a while. Here we have (American) English sneak – snuck, and
Dutch vrijen – vree – gevreeën, both of which were weak verbs not very long ago.
Linguists have long suspected and argued that frequency and analogy play a role in these
language change processes, but unlike many phonological changes, it proved impossible to deduce
the morphological equivalent of rigid sound laws for these. However, in recent times there has been
a resurgence of scholarly interest in processes of language change, especially in relation to
1
2
3
4
The author's thanks goes out foremost to my supervisors, Harry Perridon and Olga Fischer, for their generous help
and support discussing and supervising this thesis. Invaluable help was also given by Han Nijdam and Arjen
Versloot at the Fryske Akademy in Ljouwert. Naturally all conclusions, opinions, and errors are my own. Last but
not least I wish to thank my wife Diane for unrelenting (moral) support during the writing process.
Used in various dialectal and colloquial forms of English.
That is, if the reader is also a speaker of a Germanic language.
Wełna (1996: 68).
4 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
quantifiable factors like frequency.5 The advent of computer modelling in the past decades has
opened up new avenues of research on such matters.
Analogy is no exception. This cognitive faculty6 is central to human thought, and its
fingerprints can be found on many areas of language and language change as well. It does not
operate by quite the same consistent logic as is most often used in science, though, and perhaps this
is one of the reasons why its role has been ignored or downplayed in some cases. Looking at the
way strong verbs are ordered and how they change, however, I can't conclude otherwise than that
analogy plays a role in this; if not a major role, then at least a significant one.
One of the aims of this thesis is therefore to try to gain a firmer grasp of analogical language
change. Analogy, though different from logic, operates by its own rules, and it's a challenge for
cognitive scientists and linguists to make these rules explicit. The second goal of this thesis is to
make a cursory inventory of some of the more important (analogical) changes that have occurred in
the Germanic strong verb system. The second theme will be treated first, with an introduction on
key concepts such as strong and weak verbs, ablaut / vowel alternation, and analogy. This is
followed by a brief overview of types of analogical change in the Germanic strong verbs, illustrated
with examples, and some thoughts on how such changes could be modelled. The final part of the
thesis is dedicated to a practical experiment, where I use the Analogical Modeling program7 to
analyse the strong verb system of Middle Frisian, and to model certain types of changes in the
strong verbs between Middle Frisian and Early Modern Frisian. In the conclusion I will sum up the
findings on strong verb changes in the Germanic languages, and evaluate the performance of the
Analogical Modeling program on the modelling of analogical change. Finally, some words will be
dedicated to the role of analogy in the strong verb changes encountered during the research.
1.1 Research aims
The goal of the present research is twofold. In the first place, I attempt to specify different types of
5
6
7
Fitch (2007) introduces a pair of articles in Nature where the relationship between frequency and language change
is investigated. Pagel et al. (2007) looks at the way in which frequency affects the speed of lexical evolution in
Indo-European words. Even closer to home, Lieberman et al. (2007) research the effects of frequency on the rate in
which strong verbs become weak in English. Another recent study deserving mention is Versloot (2008), which
makes use of extensive geographical modelling to chart the spread of sound changes in 15th century Frisian.
Of humans, but also present on a basic level in many animals; see Holyoak & Thagard (1995: 39ff).
Skousen 1989, Skousen et al. 2002.
5 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
analogical change in the verbal system of the Germanic languages. In particular, the interaction
between 'strong' and 'weak' aspects of verbs will be studied. This part of the study will be restricted
to an exploratory overview of types of analogical change, drawing examples from various
languages for illustration.
This brings us to the second and main goal of the research: the testing of the Analogical
Modeling program as a way of analysing analogical structures and changes in Germanic strong verb
morphology. Using a plausible dataset and an appropriate set of variables, it will be investigated
whether AM can predict the structures and changes that occur. If this is indeed the case and AM
reaches a high proportion of accurate predictions, we may accept it as an adequate model of
analogical change in the Germanic verb system, paving the way for more extensive modelling of
these changes in future research.
6 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
2. Strong verbs
The strong verbs as a subdivision of the verbal system is a concept applied only to the
(Proto-)Germanic language and its later descendants.8 The mechanism that characterises this verbal
group is ablaut, being the use of vowel changes to mark tense differences.9 A subgroup of the
strong verbs in Proto-Germanic used reduplication of the stem to mark the past tense, sometimes in
addition to ablaut. These features also appear in other languages, but as a comprehensive system
the Germanic strong verbs are unique.
2.1 Origin of the strong verbs
Naturally, the strong verb system did not appear out of nowhere, and there are various
developments that can be observed when considering the history of its features. The first, ablaut,
was present in Indo-European already.10 However, ablaut in verbal morphology, in contrast to the
situation in Germanic, was not used as an exclusive marker:
[…] it is evident that ablaut itself generally does not mark a verbal category in Indo-European. On
the contrary, it is a derived property that is mostly used redundantly. In particular, the comparison
with Semitic makes it clear that Indo-European ablaut occupies a relatively marginal position in
verbal morphology.
(Mailhammer 2007a: 30f)
We may therefore assume that somewhere in the evolution between Indo-European and ProtoGermanic, ablaut grew in importance to become a significant marker of tense. It also became
systematised to a greater degree, resulting in a Germanic strong verb inflection that was highly
predictable based on the phonological structure of verbal root.11
Reduplication is another feature that was instrumental in the creation of the Germanic strong
verb system. Like ablaut, this feature was also inherited from Indo-European, but its use in
Germanic was much more restricted. Reduplication in Germanic was only applied in stem
8
As opposed to the term 'irregular' verbs, which applies to many kinds of verbal patterns that deviate from whatever
can be considered the regular inflection in a given language.
9 Ablaut in this sense is a subclass of the more general term vowel alternation.
10 See Mailhammer (2007a: 15ff) for an overview of ablaut in Indo-European.
11 See Mailhammer (2007b: 105).
7 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
formation of the preterite of certain strong verbs, sometimes combined with ablaut, whereas its role
was greater in Indo-European.12 While reduplication has been reconstructed for Proto-Germanic, it
is attested only sparingly in its daughter languages. Gothic had still preserved the greater part of
reduplicating verbs, but in North and West-Germanic, fewer traces are found. Evidently,
reduplication was in the process of being replaced by other morphological markings at the time the
languages were committed to writing. Despite this, the 'reduplicating' verbs still constituted a
separate subgroup of the strong verbs, because their earlier reduplication left clear traces in the later
forms.13
2.2 Ablaut
Ablaut thus became the main distinguishing feature of the strong verb system in the Germanic
protolanguage and its descendants.14 Since this thesis deals mainly with changes in these ablaut
patterns, we will first continue with a closer look at the phenomenon. Ablaut is a distinct type of
morphological vowel alternation that appears in various parts of speech. It can be used to mark
different inflectional categories on nouns and verbs, for example. Mailhammer (2007a: 15f) defines
it as “[…] the regular alternation of vowels in roots and affixes of etymologically and
morphologically related words […].” A distinction is made between qualitative ablaut – meaning a
change of vowel type – and quantitative ablaut, which refers to a change in vowel length.
Ablaut or vowel alternation in general is a way to mark changes on a morpheme while
keeping the original morpheme structure intact. It is different in this respect from affixation, which
adds a bound morpheme to the original morpheme.15 In the case of ablaut, however, parts of the
original morpheme (i.e. the vowel nucleus) may appear to be replaced. Let us take the English verb
sing, with its preterite form sang. At first sight, what has happened is not the addition of an
12 In IE, reduplication was used in present tense stem formation, as well as the aorist, which does not appear in
Germanic. See Mailhammer (2007a: 34). Why the role of reduplication was reduced to such a degree in Germanic
is still a matter under discussion. See Mailhammer (2007a: 45).
13 The (previously) reduplicating verbs sometimes had ablaut patterns that were different from the other classes, and
in some rare cases, a consonantal remnant of the reduplication could be found, such as Old Norse róa – rera 'to
row – rowed'. See Boer (1920: 190).
14 It is also seen by Grimm, one of the first to extensively study Germanic verb morphology, as one of the most
beautiful things in the German(ic) language: “Das starke præt. muß als hauptschönheiy unserer sprache, als eine
mit ihrem alterthum und ihrer ganzen einrichtung tief verbundene eigenschaft betrachtet werden.” (Grimm 1837:
755).
15 I.e. prefixes to the left of the original morpheme, suffixes to the right, and circumfixes both left and right.
8 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
additional morpheme to mark past tense, but instead a modification of the original stem vowel.
Nevertheless, in this case there are reasons to analyse an ablaut modification as involving two
morphemes as well. An approach that deserves to be mentioned in this respect is that presented in
McCarthy (1981). Here morphemes are seen as:
[…] an ordered string of 1 x n feature matrices associated autosegmentally with a root node μ. […]
The root node μ identifies this string as a particular morpheme. Moreover, μ bears all
nonphonological information associated with the morpheme, such as rule diacritics, whether it is a
root or an affix, and in fact its identity as a morpheme.16
A complex verb such as disappear might be represented as follows:
μ
[dɪs
μ
μ
əpɪə(r)
(d)]
The prefix, verb stem, and tense suffix each are a separate morpheme, represented by μ. In the case
of vowel alternation, it is attractive to also assume such a structure, because it seems redundant to
have to suppose a separate morpheme (i.e. sing, sang, sung) for every strong verb and every tense.
Instead, we might work with a structure similar to the one above, where the consonantal skeleton
structure is the basic verb stem morpheme, and the alternating vowels are tense morphemes:
μ
[s ɪ ŋ]
μpast
[s w ɪ m]
[s ɐ ŋ]
μ
[s w ɐ m]
μ
Seen this way, we might interpret strong verb morphemes as having some kind of internal slot for
vowels. This would make them distinct from regular verb morphemes, which in itself seems a less
attractive assumption. Perhaps one could suppose that the strong verbs have a default vowel in their
morpheme, but that because they're marked as irregular in the lexicon, this default vowel has the
16 McCarthy (1981: 376f).
9 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
potential to alternate with/be replaced by past tense morphemes such as [ɐ] above.17 In addition,
there are empirical factors that lend support to the notion of a skeletal consonant structure in strong
verb morphemes that is distinct from its vowel content.
We find a few examples in Germanic languages where diachronic developments indicate the
possible salience of a skeletal consonant structure. The first example is that of the Swedish verb
bjuda 'to offer, ask, invite'. It currently has the preterite form bjöd and the supine18 bjudit. However,
if we compare these forms to those of related earlier stages of the language, we find a difference:
Old Norse pret.sg. bauð part. boðinn. It appears that the /j/, which has regularly developed from
Gmc. /e/ before /u/, is seen by speakers of Swedish not as a relic of the vowel alternation system,
but as a part of the prevocalic consonant cluster, independent of the vowel alternation of strong
verbs. Consequently, the /j/, has probably been extended to the other tenses of the verb by analogy.
It has, in other words, become part of the verb's skeletal consonant morpheme.19
We find a similar case in Old Frisian, in the verb fiuchta.20 This verb, unlike ON bjóða <
Gmc. *beuda-, does not owe the glide in its onset to the combination /eu/; rather, the /ju/ is a result
of breaking of /e/.21 The preterite singular is not attested for this verb, and reconstructed as *facht.
In the pret.pl. and part. forms however, an alternation between forms with and without /j/ is attested:
fuchton / fiûchten – fuchten / fiuchten.22
For the remainder of this thesis, I will assume some form of morpheme combination, rather
than replacement, is involved in the ablaut process. As a consequence, changes in ablaut patterns
through analogy can be described as a combination of the verb's original skeletal consonant
morpheme with a new vowel morpheme for describing past and perfect tense.
2.3 Strong and weak as categories
Before continuing with a treatment of the concept of analogy, a word needs to be said about the
17 In the end, what the precise make-up if these morphemes is assumed to be is not relevant to the issue of the
analogical modelling of these changes.
18 Swedish, Danish and Norwegian generally use a supine form where other Germanic languages use the past
participle. Its syntactic function is identical, though, mostly indicating the perfect tense in combination with an
auxiliary verb, though the auxiliary is sometimes omitted in (colloquial) Swedish.
19 A comparable development is found in Swedish sjunga 'to sing' < ON syngja < Gmc. *sengwa-.It too has modern
past forms with /j/: sjöng rather than *söng. This illustrates that not only verbs with original Gmc. /eu/ were prone
to the development. A complete overview of morphological changes in class II of the strong verbs in Swedish can
be found in Lundberg (1921).
20 Variant: fiûchta.
21 < Gmc. *fehta-.
22 Jacobs (1899: 83).
10 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
terminology surrounding strong and weak verbs. As we have seen, weak verbs in the Germanic
languages generally mark their past and participle forms with a suffix containing a dental
consonant, like English /-d, -t, -ɪd/, Dutch /-də, tə/, etc.23 Strong verbs do not, and they have a
participle suffix ending in a nasal (/n/), rather than a dental. The presence or absence of ablaut,
however, is not always a reliable predictor of whether a verb has a dental suffix or not. There are
numerous verbs without ablaut that are still considered strong, such as Norwegian hete – het 'to be
called'. Conversely, there are verbs which have typically weak suffixation, but which do show
vowel alternation: Norwegian fortelle – fortalte 'to tell', selge – solgte 'to sell'.
For this reason, it might be better, especially when speaking of modern Germanic languages,
to have strong and weak refer to the type of affixation used on a verb (i.e. dental suffix, nasal suffix,
no suffix, etc.) and not to the presence or absence of ablaut. In other words, strong affixation will
refer to the absence of tense affixation in the preterite, and to the nasal suffix in the participle. Weak
affixation will refer to the dental suffix. Whether or not ablaut is present will be considered a
separate parameter. In fact, these parameters (affixation, ablaut) can be different not only for each
verb, but also for different tenses within the paradigm of a single verb. Dutch jagen 'to hunt', for
example, has a preterite joeg with ablaut and strong affixation, but a participle gejaagd, which is
totally regular.
The way in which the verbs of a language are distributed amongst the possible combinations
of affixation and ablaut can show certain patterns. For example, apart from one marginal verb,
Norwegian verbs cannot have weak affixation in the preterite and strong affixation in the supine at
the same time.24 On the other hand, we see this pattern quite regularly in Dutch, such as bakken 'to
bake' – bakte – gebakken, where only the participle of the originally strong verb (with ablaut:
Middle Dutch bieck) still shows strong affixation. This seems to run parallel to the relative
frequency of these tenses in the languages: Norwegian has a propensity to use the preterite as the
standard way to relate past events, while in Dutch the present perfect is used in that case. Thus we
see in both languages the tendency of the more frequent tense forms to show more autonomy, or the
ability to retain a divergent morphological form longer, despite possible pressures towards levelling
of the paradigm.25
23 There are numerous exceptions to this. Modern Frisian has a second class of weak verbs ending in -je, which does
not involve dental suffixation to create past forms. This class is the default verb class in Frisian for new
formations. See Tiersma (1985: 64f). Similarly, the first class of weak verbs in Norwegian (both Bokmål and
Nynorsk) have only suffixed /-a/, though from ON /-að-, -uð-/.
24 This goes for both Bokmål (Strik 2006) and the Oslo dialect (Enger 1998: 200ff; 2002: 61f).
25 Enger (2004) works towards capturing these phenomena in a constraint on non-affixal inflection.
11 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
3. Analogy
If the role of analogy in language change is to be investigated at all, it is essential to have a
workable definition of the concept at one's disposal. For this purpose, it will be necessary to sketch
briefly several ways in which the concept of analogy has been used by linguists, as well as present
an outline of the concept in a more general sense.
3.1 Analogy as a cognitive concept
Analogy as a cognitive concept refers to several distinct but related subconcepts: first, a similarity
or set of similarities between two concepts, the source analogue and the target analogue. The fact
that a shark and a whale both have fins is an analogy between the two, as is the fact that both live in
the sea. Second, the act of drawing this comparison is also called an analogy. The analogy is not
only there as an observable fact, the act of singling this out is part of the process of analogy. Finally,
the concept of analogy suggests a result: the analogy between two concepts is made because there is
an unknown factor that we wish to gain knowledge of.26 To return to the shark and the whale: let's
assume we know that both have fins and live in the ocean, and we know that the whale gives live
birth to its offspring. Using the analogy between the two items, we may assume by analogy that the
shark also gives live birth.27 The rationale behind making an analogy is therefore essentially the
following:
(1)
Aspect X1 = aspect Y1, therefore Y2 = X2.
Obviously, there is no logical reason why this statement should be true. In fact, strictly applied to all
aspects of all concepts, it rarely is. Nevertheless, the more completely the Aspect X1 describes X,
the more likely it seems in practice that the statement will be true.28 For, the more thorough the
description of the similar aspects, the stronger the similarity itself will be, up until the point where
26 This is true only of deliberate use of analogy, of course. Subconsciously, it is likely we make analogies all the time;
this is true of language in particular.
27 On a side note: many sharks – even though they're fish, unlike whales – do in fact give live birth. Only a few kinds
of shark lay eggs.
28 It seems more likely, but is not, because the parts of a source analogue that are not described by its known aspects
might just contain the crucial difference that sets it apart from the target analogue and causes statement (1) to be
untrue. The example of the kitchen knife and the bayonet illustrates that even though there might be a very strong
analogy between two items, there is room for all kinds of differences.
12 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
the two concepts turn out to be in an identical or partial relationship to each other:
(2)
X1 = Y1 and X1 = X, therefore X = Y1 and/or Y.
In other words, if the analogy is based on aspects that could be said to define at least part of the
essence of a concept, one assumes that the analogy 'holds', and that the second, unknown aspect,
may be transferred from the source to the target analogue. As Holyoak & Thagard (1995: 1f)
illustrate, in situations where a person is confronted with an unknown thing, and a quick
(unconscious) judgement must be made, it is natural to attempt to draw analogies between concepts
already known and the unknown target, in order to make predictions about it. The analogy may be
false and the predictions wrong, but it might be the only thing at one's disposal at that moment.
Only rarely do people have the time to make a thorough investigation of something new, and we
often use analogy to fill in the blanks of our observational knowledge.
To sum up, we may observe that analogy is a cognitive process with its own underlying
logic29 that at the same time defines and constrains its use. Following Holyoak & Thagard (1995:
5f), we can point out three main features of analogy: similarity, structure, and purpose. The first
means that analogy is based on similarity of features between concepts. Secondly, these similarities
are part of a structural domain. The two concepts have to be part of the same conceptual domain,
where structural parallels between them are assumed to be valid. Finally, analogies are made for a
purpose, i.e. the derivation of new/unknown information, or the embedding of a concept in a larger
context. Note that these three features are assumed to be cognitive guidelines, not hard and fast
rules:
These three kinds of constraints [...] do not operate like rigid rules dictating the interpretation of
analogies. Instead they function more like the diverse pressures that guide an architect engaged in
creative design, with some forces converging, others in opposition, and their constant interplay
pressing toward some satisfying compromise.
(Holyoak & Thagard 1995: 6)
In other words, the mind sacrifices the application of strict rules of empirical logic to be able to at
least come to some conclusion about an unknown concept.
29 Or analogic, as Holyoak & Thagard (1995: 5) dub it.
13 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
3.2 Analogy in linguistics
Now that we have a working definition of the analogical process, we are able to turn to a brief
examination of the way it has been applied as an explanation of linguistic processes.30 At the basis
of much later thought on analogy in language is Ferdinand de Saussure's treatment of the
phenomenon as a linguistic mechanism. De Saussure (1966: 161) views phonetic evolution as a
“disturbing force” in the grammatical integrity of a language. Because of sound changes,
grammatical relations between words are broken or become obscured, what De Saussure calls “The
Breaking of the Grammatical Bond” and “Effacement of the Structure of Words” (op. cit. 153f).
Analogy, in turn, is a process that restores grammatical bonds and structures:
Fortunately, analogy counterbalances the effect of phonetic transformations. To analogy are due all
normal, nonphonetic modifications of the external side of words.
Analogy supposes a model and its regular imitation. An analogical form is a form made on the
model of one or more other forms in accordance with a definite rule.
(op. cit. 163, italics in original text)
Let us consider the example De Saussure (loc. cit.) used to illustrate this process. The Latin
nominative form honor is an analogical formation. Originally, the forms were honōs – honōsem.
Through rhotacism of the /s/, the latter form became honōrem. At this point, the structural link
between the two word forms had become obscured. Subsequently, on the basis of other inflectional
pairs like ōrātor – ōrātōrem, the nominative of honōrem became honor. In a schema, this analogy
would look as follows:
ōrātōrem – ōrātor
honōrem – (x)
(x) = honor
In this way, the phonological regularity of the word is restored. To take De Saussure's example a bit
further, we may also note that the feature of comparison in this analogy is the phonological string
ōrem, which both words share. Since ōrem in ōrātōrem (and likely also in a larger number of forms
that end in ōrem) corresponds to nominative or, the analogical reasoning demands that ōrem in
30 For those interested in the application of analogy in other domains of cognition, culture, and science, the remainder
of Holyoak & Thagard (1995) may serve as a thoroughgoing introduction.
14 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
honōrem also correspond to a nominative form ending in or.31
Nevertheless, this analogical regularisation process is never applied across the board – i.e. it
is not the analogical equivalent of a sound law:
Analogy favors regularity and tends to unify structural and inflectional procedures. But it is
capricious; beside Kranz: Kränze, etc., stand Tag: Tage, Salz: Salze, etc., which for one reason or
another have resisted analogy. Thus we cannot say beforehand how far imitation of a model will go
or which types will bring it about.
(op. cit. 162)
De Saussure goes on to claim that analogies like these do not constitute language change in any
strict sense. That is to say, the analogical process does not change any form involved. Rather, the
old form is replaced by the rival form, which was created by analogy, while the linguistic context
remains the same (op. cit. 162ff). In other words, the phenomenon we are dealing with is a matter of
creation and replacement, instead of change. Seen from the structuralist viewpoint, this reasoning is
clear, for there appears to be no change in the position of the form in the system as a whole. This
however, is also a terminological matter, for what constitutes language change? Granted, the
linguistic forms as entities unto themselves are not changed by analogy the way they would be by
sound change, which clearly affects only a part of the form at once. Still, the form of the language
as seen from a higher vantage point changes indeed. If we compare two chronologically subsequent
'snapshots' of a language, and observe that one has the pair honōs – honōrem, while the other has
honor – honōrem, has not the language changed? It seems more prudent to acknowledge that both
phonetic change in one direction (deregularisation) and analogical replacement in the other
(regularisation) are two processes that together constitute an important part of what we may call
language change.
3.3 Analogical language change
When a different form arises based on analogy, this is of course a form of language variation.
However, we only speak of language change when such variations occur on a sufficiently large
31 It should be noted that based on the observation of this analogy, an explicit grammatical rule could be formulated,
namely that to inflect a word ending in or in the accusative, one adds -em and lengthens the o. This leads to an
interesting question about inflectional paradigms: Is the structural integrity of a paradigm based on explicit rules or
on analogical bonds between its members?
15 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
scale. If a form is only replaced by a variant, say, 1% of the time, we generally refer to such variants
as slips of the tongue.32 Likewise, if a variant only occurs in a small or otherwise divergent (say,
children) proportion of a speaker community, this new form is also less likely to be seen as a true
change. Language change on a large scale is then a shift in forms that is represented in the usage of
a significant part of the speaker community. Strictly speaking, it is totally irrelevant to a theory of
analogical change if a new variant is accepted by a larger speaker community. In other words, a
theory of analogical change that accounts for the creation of new forms for one speaker need not be
able to account for the subsequent spread of such forms in a community.
At this point, it will be necessary to sketch the interaction between speaker and community
more explicitly, because it is an essential part of the analogical change process. Let us assume that
each speaker of a language has a storehouse of linguistic forms in memory. These are fed by two
sources: speech uttered by others and by the speaker.33 Leaving aside the question of whether
regular forms are generated by rules or not, it is likely that we also remember individual regular
forms when they are actually uttered. This storehouse of registered forms is the potential dataset for
analogies. The dataset for each individual will necessarily be unique, as is the uttered speech. If an
analogical form is created by an individual, and it is uttered in a social context, this form will be
registered and stored in memory by others, who in turn will (unconsciously) consider this form
when producing their own speech. If a form for whatever reason is repeated by others,34 it may
spread over such a proportion of the speech community, that it would be justified to label it as a
change, or the rise of a significant variant. This process can also be expressed clearly in a schema:
32 See also Bloomfield (1933: 408f).
33 Or three, if one would count unuttered 'mental speech' as a separate phenomenon.
34 Or generated spontaneously by multiple speakers. This is not an unlikely scenario, since the datasets of speakers in
the same community will overlap to a large degree, yielding comparable analogical formations.
16 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
Illustration 1: Schema of the interaction between speaker(s),
speech, and language.
Individual speakers take their linguistic input from the body of speech around them,35 to which they
themselves also contribute. The speech community is nothing more than the aggregate of other
speakers, each of which has interaction with the speech around them. Language in this context is a
regularised abstraction of speech, which changes along with the observation of significant changes
in speech.
Analogy, then, as a mental faculty, is only at work in the individual speaker's mind.
However, the results of the analogical process can have repercussions on a larger scale, if these
analogical formations prove to be viable in a larger speech community. The steps from formation to
spread to acceptance are relatively easy to infer: a speaker utters a new form, and so it enters the
body of speech around that speaker. Other speakers hear the new form and store it in their
memory.36 There, it has the potential to be recalled and uttered again, and/or enter into analogical
35 Body of speech means, in this context, the whole of all speech perceived and uttered by a given speaker.
36 It quite likely in the case of many analogical innovations that multiple speakers generate the same new formations
independently. The subsequent confrontation with the same forms heard from other speakers might then strengthen
17 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
relationships with other forms. If enough speakers reproduce the new form, it enters into a growing
proportion of the different, though overlapping, bodies of speech, up until the point where many
speakers may accept the form as a standard form or at least as a tolerable alternative to the norm. If
this is the case, we may say that the form has become part of the normative abstraction we call
language, and therefore language change has occurred.
While the steps may seem clear, the processes that cause each step to occur – or not – are
more ephemeral. Here we depart from a purely linguistic domain and enter an arena where language
and social factors interact. That a form is stored in memory when it is heard is plausible enough,37
but it is not so easy to pinpoint the factors the make it more or less eligible for reproduction. One
important factor may be frequency; if a form is heard often, or from many different persons, it may
become more salient. This could account for the influence of the speech and mannerisms of some
prominent media figures, who reach a large audience or, in other terms, great numbers of bodies of
speech. In addition, the social status of the speaker may have an effect on the salience of a form.
Finally, a form itself may to a certain degree be redundant or not. If it fills a conceptual niche that
was previously under-represented, there might be a greater incentive for a speaker to start using that
form. All of these factors are extremely difficult to quantify, but there is a vast area of opportunity
for research on the intersection of linguistics and social studies in this respect, which is outside the
scope of this thesis, however.
3.4 Theories on irregular verb morphology
As we have seen, analogy operates at the level of the individual speaker's speech production. It is a
mechanism that allows for the creation of novel forms on the basis of those already present in the
lexicon. In this respect, it is a process distinct from
the rules that are assumed to underlie
regular/weak verbs. There have been many attempts in modern linguistics to account for the
distinction between regular and irregular verb morphology. One well-known theory stems from
generative phonology, exemplified by the work of Chomsky & Halle (1968). In this theory,
irregular verb forms are explained by additional rules above those that account for the regular
forms. These additional rules try to capture the fact that many irregular forms do display some form
of coherence or rule-like patterns. As is pointed out by Pinker (1999: 102ff) the problem with these
the acceptability of these new forms even more.
37 Possibly a form already enters into analogical relationships with other lexicon entries during and after it is
perceived/processed.
18 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
theories is that either a large amount of complex rules is needed to account for all of the variation in
irregular verbs, or that implausible underlying forms must be assumed to allow verbs to undergo the
rules of other verbs.38 In addition, one may wonder if such rules posited for the synchronic
explanation of existing regular forms could also be used to predict or generate new irregular
formations, or for explanations of past changes.
On the other side of the spectrum, there are connectionist models which also try to capture
all morphological variation in one system, but instead of using rules, a pattern-associator network is
used.39 This network tries to capture all form variation, both regular and irregular, using the same
mechanism, which like an analogical model is guided by similarities in form.40 However,
predictions made by such models aren't always correct, as strange phonological forms may
sometimes be predicted for verbs that would just receive a regular past suffix (/-d, -t, -ɪd/) in
English.41 A simple rule would have fewer problems with such forms, whereas a pattern associator
model may have difficulties in identifying the diverse circumstances in which the 'regular' past
suffix applies. An additional phenomenon that's not easily explained based on phonological input
alone are doublets such as dived/dove, and especially verbs that behave regularly or irregularly
depending on their meaning, such as ring-rang, ring-ringed.42
Pinker himself has devised a system which combines a rule approach with a lexical
approach: the so called 'words and rules' model.43 It is what can be called a dual-mechanism
approach; regular verbs are believed to be generated by a rule, whereas irregulars are drawn from
memory. This entails the existence of some lexical feature that can block the application of a rule
on a form. The 'words and rules' model has been criticised by connectionists for its rule-based part,
arguing among other things that rules are not as independent from meaning as Pinker would have
it.44
38 Such as *rin for run, so that it can follow the rules of sing-sang-sung. See Pinker & Ullman (2002a: 457).
39 See McClelland & Patterson (2002a: 466) for a brief summary of their model for the English past tense.
40 Indeed, in a response to the aforementioned article, Pinker & Ullman argue that “pattern associators […] tend
towards analogy when learning competing patterns under standard training regimes. This is what gives such
models their predictive power with irregular forms.” (Pinker & Ullman 2002b: 474).
41 Such as membled for mail. See Pinker & Ullman (2002a: 458).
42 The regular form as in “ringed the city”. See Pinker & Ullman (2002a: 459f).
43 With Pinker (1999) as main publication.
44 McClelland & Ullman (2002a: 468f).
19 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
3.5 Modelling analogy in linguistics
In the mean time, it seems likely that analogical or associational connections between forms play a
role in the formation and development of irregular verb forms, whether they are part of an
overarching dual-mechanism model of language as proposed by Pinker, or some alternative nonrule-based single mechanism model. While these are of course some of the most relevant current
issues in linguistics, they too are outside the scope of this text, and ultimately an issue independent
on the precise functionalities of analogy.
For the moment, it will suffice to make the following assumptions:
(1) Different inflections of the same word are somehow connected in the lexicon, e.g. speakers
'know' write and wrote are related.
(2) At the very least, irregular forms are stored in the lexicon. Whether regular forms are also
assumed to be stored depends on the overarching framework.45
(3) If a certain form cannot be retrieved from memory, and a rule cannot be applied to generate it
(either because the overarching framework assumes there are no rules, 46 or because a rule is
somehow blocked47), analogy is used to generate a new form.
Now, the main question is: how does linguistic analogy work? We have seen above how the process
operates on a 1:1 scale, comparing one source with one target analogue. In language, however, each
target analogue (the unknown form in (3) above that needs to be generated) has a myriad of
potential source forms. In the case of verbs, we may assume that all verbs known to a speaker have
the potential to influence others.48 To be able to efficiently compare a form to all the other members
of the same part of speech, some sort of streamlined sequence of comparisons must be taking place
inside the brain. To be able to make educated guesses about the workings of such a system an
analogical model is needed. This is precisely what Royal Skousen developed with his Analogical
Modeling (henceforth AM) program (Skousen 1989). The model was conceived with the aim of
making analogical processes explicit and using them to explain (linguistic) phenomena:
45 If individual inflections are not stored, than at least a basic lexical entry and an optional feature for regularity can
be assumed for all regular verbs.
46 In the case of purely usage-based frameworks.
47 By a lexical feature for irregularity, for example.
48 Additionally, it could be hypothesised that other words, such as etymologically and phonologically similar nouns,
can influence such verbs, and vice versa (Olga Fischer, private communication).
20 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
[T]his book introduces a new way of accounting for language behavior, one that can be called
analogical. But unlike the imprecise and impressionistic appeals to “analogy” that have
characterized language studies in the past, the analogical approach that this book proposes is based
on an explicit definition of analogy. The main problem with traditional analogy is that there is no
limit to its use: almost any form can be used to explain the behavior of another form, providing there
is some similarity, however meager, between the two forms. Nor does this book use analogy to
handle only the cases that rules cannot account for. Instead, everything is considered analogical,
even the cases of complete regularity.
(p.4, original italics)
As is clear, Skousen favours a model of linguistics where analogy is used to account for all, even
(seemingly) rule-like, behaviour. Nevertheless, his model of analogy as such is, again, independent
of the overarching language framework. Whether or not we agree with Skousen's point of departure
concerning the nature of language, trying to make the process of analogy more explicit by
modelling is certainly a good thing.
To restrict or specify the forms that act as a source for the analogy, the model takes three
interrelated factors into account:
(1) the similarity of the occurrence to the given context x;
(2) the frequency of the occurrence; and
(3) whether or not there are intervening occurrences closer to x with the same behavior.
(p.4)
This narrows down the groups of source analogues to those forms we might feel are truly similar to
the target, while also leaving room for the influence of more general groups of source analogues
that are less similar to the target, but still more similar than other forms. This is an advantage over
so-called Nearest Neighbour approaches [...] that only take into account the most similar analogues.
The similarity between entries (or “given contexts”, as they are called in AM) in a dataset is
calculated on the basis of a series of single character49 variables determined by the researcher using
the AM program. The meaning of each variable and value is likewise determined by the researcher.
The program only compares the values entered. The more variables two forms have in common (i.e.
49 Each variable can have a value expressed by an alphanumeric sign or other standard digital character (0-9, a-z, AZ, etc.), or a null value (=).
21 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
the respective values are the same), the more similar they are considered to be, in principle. The
model uses a more elaborate statistical method to select the group of source analogues (called the
“analogical set”). The variables of the given context are grouped into supracontexts, each with its
own subcontexts. Let's assume we have a given context with three variables: the question is whether
the English grapheme <c> stands for /k/, /s/, or /ʧ/. The variables used are the three letters following
<c>. The given context is the word <ceiling>, so the variables are e,i,l. There are 23 possible
combinations of these variables, and therefore 8 supracontexts:
all three variables:
eil
two variables, one ignored:
ei-, e-l, -il
one variable, two ignord:
e--, -i-, --l
all three variables ignored:
---
For each of these supracontexts, entries in the dataset are found that also occur in that supracontext.
For example, <cell> would fit into e-l, e--, and –l, wherears <cyclone> would only fit into –l.
Naturally, all dataset entries fit into ---.
The contexts are ordered such that the supracontexts are ordered in a lattice (see Skousen et
al. 2002: 15), where each supracontext can be a subcontext of another. Thus, eil is the topmost
supracontext, but it has ei-, e-l, and -il as its subcontexts. ei-, in turn, has e-- and -i- as its
subcontexts, but not --l, and so forth.
The next step is to determine whether a supracontext is homogeneous or not:
Basically, a supracontext is homogeneous if all its possible subcontexts behave identically. In
predicting the outcome for a given context, we use only the occurrences in homogeneous
supracontexts. All heterogeneous supracontexts are ignored.
In analogical modeling, there can be two different types of homogeneous supracontexts for a given
context: either (1) the supracontext is deterministic (only one outcome occurs), or (2) the
supracontext is non-deterministic but all the occurrences occur within only one subcontext of the
supracontext.
[...]
Ultimately, whether a supracontext is homogeneous or heterogeneous is determined by using a
nonlinear statistical procedure based on measuring the number of disagreements between different
occurrences within a supracontext. To do this we connect all the occurrences within a supracontext
to each other by means of a system of pointers.
22 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
[...]
The homogeneous supracontexts form what is called the analogical set. The final step in analogical
prediction is to randomly select one of the occurrences in the analogical set and make our prediction
based on the outcome assigned to this occurrence.
In this thesis the most probable outcome for each context is taken as the main result. It is also listed
in the output file as “expected outcome” by the AM program. If it is the same outcome as the one
specified by the researcher in the test set, it is listed by the program as “predicted correctly.”
23 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
4. Morphological change in strong verbs
There are several types of change in the morphology of strong verbs that can be distinguished, and
for each we must see whether analogy might be involved, and if so, in what way. We will ignore for
the time being the changes within suffix morphemes and other changes in the inflection for person,
number, etc., focusing instead on changes in the way in which the stem morpheme is altered, or
combined with these inflectional morphemes. In other words, what will be discussed is changes in
vowel alternation patterns and/or changes in affixation between the strong and weak type.
4.1 Vowel alternation change
The first change simply concerns the vowel alternation pattern of a verb. Consider the verb briste 'to
burst, break' in the Oslo dialect of Norwegian. Its current vowel alternation pattern is /i – a – i/:
brister (pres.) – brast (pret.) – bristi (sup.). Historically, however, and still in Nynorsk and various
other dialectal forms of Norwegian, the supine form had a back vowel (Nynorsk broste with /o/),
which has its parallel in Old Norse /o/, as in brostinn. Now, the change from a back vowel to /i/ is
most certainly not a regular one in Norwegian, so we could assume that the supine vocal of the verb
briste for some reason changed in analogy to other verbs which already had that vocal. Analysing
this change from a higher level, we might say that briste has shifted to a different class of verbs
with vowel alternation: from /i – a – Vback/ to /i – a – i/.
A less unequivocal example is the Norwegian Bokmål variant of briste. It also has /i/ in the
supine, but the strong affixation in the Bokmål supine (ending in /-ət/) is identical to that of the first
weak class 1. The form which we find, then, bristet, could be either strong or weak. However, the
supine form of weak class 1 has the alternative ending /-a/, so one way to test for weakness is to see
whether this form appears..50 A Google search for the alternative weak form har/er brista does not
yield a great many results, yet some examples do pop up.51 It therefore seems possible that a weak
supine form has snuck52 into this verb, which leads us to a second type of change.
50 Both /-ət/ and /-a/ are possible in Bokmål
51 “Etter X-ray scanning fant vi ut at begge har brista høyre tommel.”; “siden jeg har brista ribbein så greier jeg ikke
og kjøre veldig mye”; “Tenk om beinet faktisk er brista eller noe annet virkelig er galt inni der?” Approximately
500 hits using a basic Google search for “har brista”: 'have broken'.
52 Or sneaked?
The question remains what the source analogue is for this change. Is the new supine vowel modelled after that
24 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
4.2 Weakening
This second type of change has to do with the other component that defines strong verbs: a different
type of affixation. Weak verbs in the Germanic languages typically use a suffix containing a dental
plosive to mark preterite and perfect forms, for example English /-(ɪ)d, t/, Dutch /-t(ɘ), -d(ɘ)/, etc.
Strong verbs, on the other hand, tend to have no suffix at all in the preterite form, usually having a
vowel change as the only difference marker between infinitive and past forms: English sing vs sang.
In the perfect form, the strong verbs usually have an affix ending in /n/, such as Old Norse brostinn
above, or English broken.53
If a form of a strong verb, say the preterite, shifts from a strong affixation (i.e. no affixation)
to a weak one, we can call this a 'weakening' of the form in question. This weakening does not have
to happen in all relevant areas of the paradigm at once, as is illustrated by the Dutch verb bakken 'to
bake': the past form in Middle Dutch was bieck /bik/, but has since become bakte, which is a regular
modification of the basic stem bak-. The perfect participle remains strong to this day, however:
gebakken.
A possible additional example is the Norwegian Bokmål verb briste discussed above. We
have already seen that some speakers of Norwegian employ a weak supine for this verb, but weak
preterites (the same form brista, but without an auxiliary verb) can also be found on the Internet. 54
So, while for the majority of Norwegian speakers this verb is still strong, the weak forms have been
surfacing in both the preterite and the supine, so it is possible that there are speakers for which this
verb has undergone systematic (possibly partial) weakening.
A final consideration is the following: would it be possible for a strong verb to gain weak
affixation, whilst retaining vowel alternation in that same form? We know that there are weak verbs
with vowel alternation, like Norwegian fortelle, but these were never strong to begin with. There
are, however, a few examples of verbs that seem to exhibit this particular type of weakening. For
Middle English beginnen 'begin', we find preterite forms begond, begunde, which appear to
combine vowel alternation with a dental suffix.55 A similar form is Early Modern English stunged as
of the present, and subsequently reinterpreted as a weak form, allowing for the variant brista, or did the supine
weaken immediately, perhaps due its less autonomous position as compared to the past tense, as we have seen
above.
53 Note that in English, an absence of any suffix is also a feature of some strong verbs, e.g. burst – burst – burst.
54 “så sa det KNEKK i brystet og jeg brista et ribbein.”; “Faen, jeg brista ankelen når jeg spillte fotball i dag.”;
Approximately 1.750 hits using a basic Google search for “jeg brista”: 'I broke'. Most of the hits involve the
breaking of a bone in the body, but other objects also occur, such as one's voice, or an LP.
55 Wełna (1996: 127).
25 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
the preterite of sting.56 Such changes are few and far between, though, so it seems likely that most
speakers consider these forms to be somehow less well-formed than full-blown strong (with ablaut)
or weak (without) ones. Perhaps this is due to a process (also possibly analogical) that ties strong
affixation to ablaut, and weak affixation to lack of ablaut. In other words, there might be a pair of
categories with fuzzy boundaries, one strong, one weak, both with their prototypical morphological
tendencies and a number of exceptional members.
4.3 Strengthening
The converse change is also possible: a 'strengthening' of weak verbs. Apparently, some classes of
strong verbs have such a strong position in the verb system that they 'recruit' by analogy members
from the weak verbs. The Dutch verb vrijen 'to make love, to court' is a good example of this. It
used to be a weak verb – vrijde, gevrijd – but has become strong in modern Dutch: vree, gevreeën.
The obvious source analogue of this case is the class of strong verbs which has the vowel
alternation /ɛj – e: – e:/,57 which includes a large number of verbs such as rijden 'to ride' and bijten
'to bite'.
Partial strengthening is also among the possibilities, as illustrated by Dutch verbs like
waaien 'to blow (of the wind)' and jagen 'to hunt', which have strong pasts with vowel alternation:
woei, joeg, but weak past participles: gewaaid, gejaagd. Interestingly, these verbs are today
subjected to (partial) weakening, where the past is often being replaced by the original weak form.
Again, it needs to be investigated whether (partial) strengthening without vowel alternation
also occurs.
4.4 Verb stem reinterpretation
The previous types of change are assumed to be based on an interaction of the declination of one
verb with a larger part of the verbal system. However, there is also evidence for change that is
restricted to the paradigm of an individual verb, such as the case of the aforementioned Old Frisian
fiuchta – see section 2.2 above – which does not have to be repeated here.58
56 Op. cit. 177.
57 The Modern Dutch continuation of strong verb class 1.
58 Note however, that such reinterpretations can happen for multiple verbs at the same time. Swedish bjuda wasn't the
only verb to extend the /j/ to other tenses than the present. Verbs like sjunka and njuta, and many more, showed the
same development. Again, the reader is referred to Lundberg (1921) for an overview.
26 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
4.5 Interparadigmatic and Intraparadigmatic change
Although the faculty of analogy that is thought to underlie different kinds of processes is essentially
a constant, the way in which it interacts with linguistic data is likely to be different in various types
of change. Even within the relatively constrained area of verbal morphology change, we have seen
that analogy can work in various 'directions'. For example, verbs that incorporate a new form based
on analogy with other verbs, such as changes in ablaut patterns, take source analogues outside their
own verbal paradigm. They exhibit what we may call interparadigmatic change. On the other hand,
we have verbs like Swedish bjuda and Old Frisian fiuchta, which seem to base their change solely
on phenomena that occur within their own declension paradigm, i.e. intraparadigmatic change.
Interparadigmatic change depends on the example of other verbal paradigms, so it is
hypothesised that the changing verbal form is somehow compared to those of other (related) verbs.
To model this, one should create a data set which contains the full spectrum of (strong) verbs in a
given linguistic situation.
Intraparadigmatic change, on the other hand, is a different matter. In the case of verbs like
bjuda, the reanalysis takes place in the dominant tense, in this case most likely the present, and
spreads by analogy to forms where the /j/ was not original. First of all, this seems to indicate that a
powerful abstraction process has taken place when speakers process verbs with vowel alternation.
At some point, the focus on the vowel morpheme as being the bearer of tense information causes
the speaker to separate it from its consonantal surroundings. The /j/ in this case becomes part of that
consonant environment.59 Based on this skeleton-and-content view of the vowel alternating verb
structure, there seems to be a tendency for speakers to level out the skeleton structure in all
declensions, varying only the vowel and/or affixation to mark tense differences, viz. bjuda, bjöd,
bjudit instead of bjuda, *böd, *budit. The underlying motivation for this change seems clear
enough, but it is another matter to be able to predict when such a change takes place. If only the
paradigm of the verb itself is taken into account, there is no analogical 'pressure' from other verbs to
regularise the skeleton structure of the verb. If, however, other verbs with a similar skeleton
structure – for example obstruent + /j/ – are taken as comparison, it would be possible to use AM or
59 Note that in this case, the original ablaut vowels /e/ and /a/ have completely lost their original function to other
phonemes in the verb. Thus, /e/, as we have seen, has become /j/, and subsequently part of the consonant skeleton,
while past sg. /a/ has merged with /u/, which was originally part of the verbal stem, which leaves us with the
current form /ø:/ in bjöd.
27 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
a similar analogical model to predict whether the verb in question is likely to spread the /j/ to other
tenses as well. The success of these predictions might then make conclusions possible about
whether other verbs can influence the reinterpretation of consonantal skeleton morphemes in the
strong verb system. If this is the case, than we might be dealing with a type of change that is also
interparadigmatic after all. However, this question falls outside the scope of the current research.is
excluded from the present research due to time and space constraints.
Consonantal changes which seem to be purely intraparadigmatic are levellings of consonants
that alternate according to Grammatischer Wechsel. A fine example is Middle English frēse 'freeze',
which has pret. frǭs and part. frǭsen. Old English had part. froren, however, which indicates that
there is a tendency to level out the consonant structure of the stem in this area as well. 60 All the
same, it is theoretically possible that this kind of levelling can also be influenced by analogy; i.e. it
might be that verbs are more likely to level out such differences if analogous verbs have already
done so.
Another type of intraparadigmatic change is the levelling of ablaut within a single paradigm.
Take the English verb sting, for example. In Early Modern English and earlier language stages, it
had a ablaut pattern like that of sing. However, the preterite of the verb is currently stung, rather
than earlier stang/stong.61 In such cases, it seems likely that the vowel spread from the participle to
the preterite. However, it is also conceivable that once one or more verbs have had this levelling
other verbs may follow suit, by analogy to these new forms.62 Taking this into account, we can
hypothesise that intraparadigmatic changes may serve as the origin of series of changes that may
later become interparadigmatic or a mix of the two.
In the parts above I have given an overview of the typical aspects of Germanic strong verbs, the
changes they exhibit, as well as a treatment of the concept of analogy in general cognitive and
linguistic contexts. In addition, I have presented an introduction to the Analogical Modeling
program, which will be used in the following sections to model certain aspects of Middle Frisian
strong verb morphology. Of the strong verb changes, only interparadigmatic changes involving
60 See Wełna (1996: 120). Cf. also Modern Dutch, which levelled the verb the other way: vriezen – vroor – gevroren.
But: Brabantic Dutch vroos – gevrozen, like English.
61 See Wełna (1996: 177).
62 Yet another possible explanation involves the analysis of /ʌ/ as a general marker of past tense in English, that is to
say, a vowel morpheme that has grown independent of particular ablaut patterns. Cf. Hogg's (1988: 38) analysis of
the past tense snuck for sneak. This factor might also be involved in the formation of partially weakened preterite
forms like stunged (Wełna 1996: 177).
28 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
ablaut patterns will be investigated, due to space constraints in this thesis.
An extension of this research also involving strengthening and weakening of verbs could be
devised easily. It would involve a dataset of all verbs in a language stage, described in the same way
as the strong verbs, in the manner explained below. It would then be possible to see if strengthening
and weakening of verbs can be explained by analogy, or if other factors must be sought out.
29 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
5. Modelling analogical change in Middle Frisian
For the experimental part of this research, I will now turn to the language written during the 14th
through 16th centuries in what is the current province of Fryslân in the Netherlands. This language
has been called Old West Frisian63 on account of its location, or Post-Classical Old Frisian, because
the lower age of the sources compared to those that originate in East Frisian territory. There are,
however, linguistic reasons for looking more closely at the period terminology surrounding West
Frisian. The reader is referred to Versloot (2004) for an overview of this issue, where the linguistic
features of different stages of Frisian are compared with those of other (old) Germanic languages.
For the rest of this thesis, I will adopt the terminology used by Versloot (2008), using the name
Middle Frisian for the language of this period:
time frame
+- 1300
in this study
Old
1300-1400
1400-1550
(Late) Old Frisian Middle Frisian
Frisian
current/alternative
labels
Classical Old Frisian
1550-1750
1750-
(Early)
Modern Frisian
Modern Frisian
Post-Classical
Middle Frisian Modern Frisian
Old Frisian
Table 1: Periodisation of West Frisian (Adapted from Versloot 2008: 8).
The source I have used for this thesis is the manuscript Jus Municipale Frisonum, originating in the
Fryslân of the Middle Frisian period. It is generally abbreviated as Jus or J, was written around
1530, and contains copies of material dating back to 1464.64
The Middle Frisian language of this source is, as the (new) term suggests, typologically
comparable to that of other Middle Germanic languages, though it has some features that are more
archaic than those of Middle Dutch or Middle Low Saxon, for example (Versloot 2004: 281ff). This
has some consequences for the treatment of the verbs in the source material. Since these texts were
traditionally categorised as Old Frisian, the lemmata in the dictionary on Jus (Buma?) are given in a
reconstructed (Pan-)Old Frisian form, which is more archaic than what was the linguistic reality at
the time of writing of J. It is often difficult to retrieve a default form for a verb, because most
63 Not to be confused with West-Fries, the Dutch-based dialect of the area of West-Friesland in the Dutch province of
Noord-Holland.
64 See Johnston (2001: 575).
30 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
attestations in the text are of preterite and participle forms, with only a few present forms and hardly
any infinitives. The reconstructions of such default forms is therefore necessary, in order to be able
to enter these forms into the dataset. However, there are notable phonological differences between
Old and Middle Frisian. In the case of the verb stems, the most important are consonant
degemination and vowel lengthening in open syllables. According to recent research by Versloot on
the manuscript Codex Unia, degemination of long consonants has taken place approximately
between 1420 and 1460. While Old Frisian preserved an opposition between long and short
consonants – as is still the case in some Germanic languages today – this contrast was lost during
the beginning of the Middle Frisian period (Versloot 2008: 85ff).
The development of open syllable lengthening is considerably more complicated, with
different patterns for different vowels, also influenced by the presence of unstressed /a/ in a
following syllable. The process is summarised by Versloot (2008: 128), and it will suffice to
mention here that, as far as vowel lengthening did take place – which is not always the case – it is
already present in the sources studied in this thesis. In general, /ɛ/, /a/ and /ɔ/ before unstressed /a/
are only lengthened in the southwest of Fryslân, and even there not always (Versloot 2008: 128).65
Because unstressed /a/ is fairly commonplace in the verbal paradigm of Old Frisian, many of the
vowels were not lengthened.66
The verb forms entered into the dataset for Middle Frisian are therefore based, if possible,
on actual attestations of the default (infinitive) form, and otherwise on a transformation of the
reconstructed Old Frisian form, by applying degemination and open syllable lengthening where
needed. Old Frisian banna, for example, will be described as /ban-/, while drega becomes /dre:ɣ-/.
5.1 The Middle Frisian verb system
For those unfamiliar with the make-up of the Old and Middle Frisian verb system, a short overview
will now follow, so that the results of the investigation can be placed in their proper context. Since
no grammar of Middle Frisian67 is available, the basic outline is provided by taking the Old Frisian
verb system as a point of departure. In many cases, Old Frisian grammars list typically Old West
Frisian forms separately, and these represent a great deal of the innovations that were unique to Old
West Frisian / Middle Frisian.
65 Compare Modern Frisian /brɛkə/ 'break' with Modern Dutch /bre.kə/.
66 Versloot, private communication.
67 i.e. 15th and 16th century Frisian.
31 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
Like in the other Old Germanic languages and the parent language, there were four main
groups of verbs in Old Frisian: Weak, Strong, Preterite-Present, and Anomalous. Verbs were
inflected for tense (pres. and pret.), mood (indicative, subjunctive, imperative), number (sg. and
pl.), and person (1., 2., 3., but in sg. only; Old Frisian had a uniform plural ending).68
The preterite-present verbs and anomalous verbs will be left out of this study; they are
relatively rare and have such a divergent paradigm that they are not suitable for a basic analogical
comparison with the strong verbs.
Of the weak verbs, two classes remained. The first class originally had stems followed by *jan. These verbs received the well-known dental suffixes for preterite and participle formation.
Some of these verbs, like sēka 'to seek' – sōchte, have a form of vowel alternation.69 The second
class originally had *-ōjan-, and used -(a)de to form the preterite and participle. This second class is
still in use in Modern Frisian, though the suffix has been reduced to /-ə/.70
What follows is a brief overview of the ablaut patterns of the strong verbs in Old (West)
Frisian. The list of examples used are not exhaustive; some of these verbs have more variant forms
than is listed in the table.
Class
Ia
Ib
II
IIIa 71
IIIb
IVa
68
69
70
71
Present/Infinitive
Pret.sg.
Pret.pl.
Pret.part.
/i:/
/e:/
/e:/, /i:/
/i(:)/, /e(:)/
grîpa
grêp
grîpen, grêpen
grîpen, grêpen
/i:/
/e:/, /jo/
/jo/
/jo(:)/, /ju(:)/
scrîwa
scrêf, scriou
scriouwen
scriûwen
/ja(:)/
/a:/
/e(:)/, /a:/
/e(:)/, /a:/
kiâsa
kâs
kêren
kêren, kerren
/i/
/a(:)/, /o(:)/
/u(:)/, /o(:)/
/u(:)/, /o/
binda
bant, bont
/e/
/a/, /o/
/u/, /o/
/u(:)/, /o(:)/
helpa
halp, holp
holpen
hulpen, holpen
/e/
/e(:)/
/o:/
/e(:)/
stela
stel, stêl
*stêlon
stelen, stêlen
bonden, bûnden bonden, bunden
Bremmer (2009: 61); Jacobs (1899: 29f).
Bremmer (2009: 70f); Jacobs (1899: 133ff).
Bremmer (2009: 71); Jacobs (1899: 185ff).
Bremmer and Jacobs exchange the subclasses IIIa and IIIb. Bremmer's IIIa is Jacobs' IIIb and vice versa. The same
applies to class IVa and IVb.
32 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
IVb
/i/, /o/, /u/
/a(:)/, /o(:)/
/o:/, /a:/
/i/, /o/
nima (koma/kuma)
nam, nâm
nâmen
nimen
/e/
/e(:)/, /a/
/e:/, /a:/
/e(:)/, /a:/
geva
gef, gâf
iêven
eiêven
/a(:)/, /e/
/o:/
/o:/
/a(:)/, /e/
fara
fôr
fôren
faren, feren
V
VI
Reduplicating
various
72
Table 2: Overview of Old/Middle Frisian Strong Verb Classes
The coming into being of subclass 1b is one of the most conspicuous Old West Frisian innovations.
Most other changes have to do with individual verb changes, and have little effect on the overall
characteristics of these classes, which still cover the spectrum of Old West Frisian ablaut quite well.
5.2 Report of the research
5.2.1 Introduction of the research and dataset
The dataset of Middle Frisian verbs will be used for two main investigations. The first is a general
overview of the system, in which the analogical relationships between the verbs are mapped. The
second is geared specifically toward the modelling of language change, and it attempts to explain
certain changes in strong verb vowel patterns that took place between Middle Frisian and Early
Modern Frisian.
Modelling the verb system as a whole will show us to what degree the forms of the verbs
can actually be predicted from analogical comparison with other verbs. In this part of the research,
the test set is identical to the dataset, which means that all given outcomes (the actual forms) will be
re-evaluated using the analogical model. The outcome will present itself as follows. First of all, the
AM program will aggregate the results of all predictions, giving a total number and proportion of
contexts for which the result was predicted correctly. Note that high levels of correct prediction for
the system as a whole (e.g. >90%) are not likely. Were it the case that the AM could correctly
predict all of the actual forms, this would mean that the inflection of strong verbs is completely
predictable on the basis of the phonological structure of the verb's default form, and could even be
72 See Jacobs (1899: 116ff).
33 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
reduced to a number of rules. In reality, however, we know that strong verbs tend to be more fickle
than this. All the same, differences between outcomes for different datasets (i.e. different languages
or language stages) may point towards a difference in 'analogical coherence' or predictability. This,
in turn, can be interesting from a comparative and/or typological perspective.
The analysis of the strong verb system of Jus is based on a dataset of 223 verb entries,
including prefixed verbs. Some verb types are listed multiple times in the dataset to represent
alternative outcomes. For each verb type, the attestations in J were described and entered into the
dataset, yielding a total amount of 99 preterite singular forms, 66 preterite plural forms, and 151
participle forms. In this analysis, the AM program will try to predict which vowel nucleus will be
present in a verb in its pret.sg, pret.pl, and part. inflections. For example, for the verb nima /nɪm-/,
the results are /a:/, /o:/, and /ɪ/ for pret.sg, pret.pl, and part. respectively.73 Since the AM program
can only compute one result at a time, the predictions for each tense are computed separately.74
What follows is an overview of which components make up the dataset used in this research;
i.e. which variables where selected, why, and how they are described by characters. The description
of each entry in the dataset (context) consists of three parts: the outcome, the variables, and the
name/description. The outcome, as mentioned above, represents the value we want to predict. The
variables describe the (mostly phonological) characteristics of the entry. The name, finally, is
simply a tool to quickly be able to reference which verb the entry represents, along with its
traditional classification. A sample entry from the dataset looks like this:
.ast , b = = i I n d = I I d 2 , binda 3
The variables, separated from the outcome and name by commas, are as follows:
1 2 3 4
5
6 7 8 9
10
11
12
73 The outcomes are presented by the program in a form dictated by the researcher. To find a middle ground between
one far too specific outcome (vowel values and affixation type for all tenses), which will likely be unique for too
many verbs to allow for useful predictions, and too many separate outcomes (one for vowel value, one for
affixation, per tense – total: 6 outcomes), I have opted to combine vowel value and affixation type for each tense.
In this case, the outcomes are represented by a four-character code, such as “a:st”. The first two characters describe
the vowel value of the form's nucleus, /a:/ in this case, while the last two indicate the type of affixation involved. In
almost all cases in this research, this will be “st”, meaning a strong affixation: no tense suffix in the preterite,
and /-ən/ in the participle. In datasets where strong and weak verbs are mixed, the distinction between types of
affixation becomes relevant.
74 Because only one result can be computed at a time, it is not possible to use AM to predict an entire verbal
paradigm at once. If this were possible, it would make AM even more suitable for the modelling of verbal
morphology. Perhaps future versions of the program will allow for the computation of multiple results at once.
34 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
onset
nucleus coda
nucleus summary
Last
C no. of stem syll.
repeated
The first eight variables are reserved for the basic phonological description of the stem of the verb.
First of all, the value <=>75 stands for a null or empty space. A variable with this value is ignored in
the computation. For consonants, the value used is as close as possible to the character in the IPA
alphabet. /k/ is entered as <k>, /t/ as <t>, and so on. AM only allows entry of basic alphanumeric
characters, so <G> is used to transcribe /ɣ/,76 <X> for /x/, and <N> for /ŋ/. For consonants in the
coda, a <0> was used in place of a <=> in variables 6 and 7 to emphasise the difference between
single consonants and consonant clusters in the rhyme. As for vowels, No distinction is made
between allophones, and differences in vowel length are indicated as follows: long vowels are
indicated in variable 4 and 5 as a doubling of the vowel, so /a:/ becomes <a a>. A short vowel is
indicated by the vowel in lower case once and then upper case once: /a/ is <a A>. In variable 9 and
10, variable 5 is repeated twice. The reason for this system is twofold. First of all, the nucleus
vowels are described twice to increase the weight of this aspect of the form's phonology in the
analogical computation. Furthermore, the descriptions of long and short versions/allophones of the
same phoneme always overlap slightly (the value in variable 4 is always the same), to ensure that
there is some degree of similarity between long and short vowels of the same kind, but not as much
as between vowels that are identical. Variables 6 to 8 describe the coda of the verb stem, and the last
consonant sound of the coda is repeated in 11 for emphasis. Effectively, the rhyme of each verb
stem is weighted more heavily than the onset, building on the assumption that it is the rhyme that
plays an important role in strong verb analogy. Finally, in variable 12, the number of syllables of the
verbal infinitive77 – not the stem – is given to distinguish monosyllabic verbs such as siân and slân
from the more common ones like skiâta.78 If this variable were left out, the model would treat an
entry like slân as the stem of a verb *slâna.
This set of variables only attained its final form after a number of tests with earlier designs.
Indeed, the only way to test the accurateness of a set of the variables is to run the program with
75 Angled brackets indicate graphemes and/or plain text values in digital files.
76 Contrasting with <g> = /g/. In practice, the two are in complementary distribution, so we only find <g> in the onset
and <G> elsewhere. This particular distinction is maintained however, to illustrate the phonetic difference.
77 Apart from any possible prefixes.
78 These monosyllabic verbs are contracted forms originating in Proto-Gmc. forms with /eh/, /ah/, /euh/, /ãh/. For
example skiân < *skehan, slân < *slahan, tiân < *teuhan, fân < fanhan. Of a different kind is perhaps dwân <
*dôan.
35 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
different sets and compare the prediction behaviour. In the early designs, the rhyme was only
described once, with no added emphasis. This resulted in a system where similarities in the onset
were about as important as those in the rhyme, and the results reflected this, grouping verbs together
on the basis of their onset consonants and making more wrong predictions. By emphasising the
nucleus and (to a lesser degree) the coda, similarities in this area generate much more pointers than
similarities in the onset, and this increased the rate of accurate predictions. The way the nucleus was
described also underwent a change. At first, long vowels occupied two variables (/a:/ is <a a>),
whereas short vowels occupied only one (/a/ is <a =>). This, however, overestimated the similarity
between long and short vowels, also negatively influencing the rate of accurate predictions, which is
why the current design was made, to find a balance between similarity and difference between long
and short vowels of the same kind. Finally, experiments were done where the onset of the form was
left out entirely. This, in theory, would emphasise the effect of rhyme even more. However, the
effect was adverse, because the AM program now considered verbs that rhyme exactly to be
identical, and therefore ineligible for comparison.79 In the end, therefore, the description of the onset
was kept, in order to distinguish genuinely rhyming verbs from each other, while the emphasised
rhyme description downplays the onset's influence in the comparison. An added advantage is that
this method allows for possible onset influences to reveal themselves, even though their effects are
assumed to be smaller than those of the rhyme.80
Finally, for reference purposes, I will present an example of the result for one prediction.
This extract from the results file describes the prediction for the verb koma, with the expected
pret.sg. outcome <o:st>, or /ko:m/. This result was not predicted correctly, because the result was
strongly influenced by the verb nima and its variants. The expected result (/o:/) did show up as the
second most likely outcome, but the program only checks for the correctness of the most likely
outcome, in this case /a:/.
“Statistical summary” lists all the outcomes predicted by the program, along with their
computed likelihood of occurring. “Analogical set” lists all the entries that were included in the
analogical set.81 Finally, “Gang effects” lists the precise influence of each verb in the analogical set.
79 Note that this only applies when the program is set to “exclude given context”. If the given context is included,
contexts are compared to themselves in addition to other forms, resulting in a very high rate of accurate
predictions. This however, does not seem to be an accurate representation of reality, where analogy is assumed to
be utilised precisely because the given context has an unknown outcome.
80 A number of smaller adjustments to the dataset description were made at various stages during the research, such
as adding a variable for the number of syllables in the verb stem, and using <0> instead of <=> for empty positions
in the coda.
81 See section 3.5 above.
36 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
37 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
Illustration 2: Snapshot of the AM results file, part 1.
38 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
Illustration 3: Snapshot of the AM results file, part 2.
5.2.2 Synchronic modelling of the Middle Frisian strong verbs
5.2.2.1 Preterite singular
What follows are the summarised results of experiments where the whole dataset was used as a
testset, in order to assess the analogical coherence of the strong verb system in Jus.82 First, the
preterite singular results. The outcomes attested for this tense are based mostly on 3rd person
indicative forms, with some 1st person indicative attestations also found. 2nd person singular
preterites generally share their vowel with the preterite plural, so they would have been excluded
from this set, but they were not attested anyway. Optative attestations, which were present, were
82 The documents containing the complete AM program results are too large to incorporate into this thesis. They are
available from the author upon request.
39 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
excluded for the same reason.
Attested
/a/
Outcome
/a/
/ɛ/ /ɪ/ /o/ /o/ weak /u/
weak
Predicted 9/17 0/1
/a:/ /e:/
/i:/ /io:/ /o:/
/u:/ Total
weak
0/6 0/2 1/5 0/1
0/1
correctly
8/1 17/2 0/2 0/1 9/20
8
2
1/3 45/99
(45,5%)
Table 3: Number of pret.sg. outcomes predicted correctly out of total amount of attested outcomes,
per outcome type.
As we can see, there are several outcomes that were predicted with more accuracy than others. In
particular verbs with /a/, /e:/ and /o:/ as pret.sg. vowels show an above average rate of correct
predictions.
The /a/-pasts almost exclusively belong to verbs traditionally classified under III, like binda,
finda and helpa. Some class 5 verbs also have attestations with /a/. namely lidza - <lach>; siân
<sach>; and wesa <was>. The verbs containing the alternation /ɪ/ - /a/, such as the aforementioned
finda, were predicted correctly.83 These seem to form a mutually strengthening analogical group.
Siân - <sach> /sax/ was predicted incorrectly as /so:x/.
Predicted incorrectly was helpa - <halp>, predicted as /holp/, under influence of jelda, nella
and werpa. Sterva - <starf(f)> was predicted as /sto:rf/ under influence of steppa and swera. Similar
wrong predictions (as /o/ or /o:/) were made for werda and wesa. Sjonga - <sangh> /saŋ/ was
predicted as /so:ŋ/ under influence of different forms of koma and stonda on account of the
shared /o/. The second prediction was /sa:ŋ/, under influence of a set of seven verbs which also have
an /i/-glide in second position, such as kiâsa and biâda. This form with /a:/ was in fact attested as
<saeng>. Apparently, however, the current form of the verb84 shows too little resemblance to its
original class companions with /ɪ/ and /ɛ/ for the program to predict the correct form with /a/.
Twinga - <twangh> /twaŋ/ was predicted as /twa:ŋ/ (49,8%) but with the correct /twaŋ/ as a close
second (49,4%). This is because the rhyming verb springa has variants with both /a/ and /a:/. The
difference in favor of /a:/ was made by influence of tiân, on the basis of onset /t/. The same applies
by extension to bitwinga - <betwangh/betwanck>.
The set with /e:/ in the pret.sg. contains many verbs categorised as class I. This is hardly
83 With the exception of twinga, but see below.
84 /sjoŋ-/ < Proto-Gmc */sɛŋw-/ through breaking.
40 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
surprising as /e:/ is the regular development for Old Frisian from Proto-Gmc. /ai/. Apart from these
verbs, we find some verbs from classes 4, 5 and the reduplicating class, as well as one verb from
class 2. Most of the class I verbs were predicted correctly, such as blîwa - <bleef(f)> /ble:f/ and
krîga - <creegh> /kre:x/. Class 4 verb breka (and the prefixed undbreka) was also predicted
correctly, influenced by the three different attestations of spreka, tospreka and wederspreka.
Another small but mutually strengthening set is hêta (incl. onthêta) and lêta. all of which were
predicted correctly with each other as main influences.
An incorrect prediction was made for bifella - <bifeel/byfeel> /bife:l/, under the influence of
the rhyming nella - /nolde/ and falla - /fu:l/; /fo:l/. In actual practice this influence was perhaps
smaller or absent because nella is an anomalous contraction of ne wolla 'not want', and as such
might be considered less salient for analogical processes by speakers.85 The only class II verb with
this outcome, fliâta, was also among those verbs incorrectly predicted, mainly under influence of
verbs like slân and hlâpa. The attested form <flet> ?/fle:t/ is exceptional, because most class 2 verbs
show /a:/ in the pret.sg. The form with /e:/ is perhaps an early development in the direction of later
(Early) Modern Frisian, where most class 2 verbs show <ea> /ɪ.ə/.86 Another incorrect prediction
occurred for bigunga - <bigheengh> /bɪɣe:ŋ/. With nearly 62% probability, /a/ was predicted as
most likely outcome, under influence of verbs like bitwinga and sionga, with the /ŋ/ as chief
similarity. This verb is another case where the form is too divergent87 from others sharing the same
outcome for a correct prediction to be made. Sitta - <seeth> /se:t/ was incorrectly predicted as /a/
or /a:/ based on similarity with (ont)springa and bi/untslûta. Again, no other verbs with /ɪ/ as base
vowel has /e:/ in the pret.sg., so we are dealing with an idiosyncratic form.88 While (und)breka was
positively predicted under influence of spreka and its prefixed variations, the reverse is not true. In
the case of spreka, tôspreka, and wederspreka, interference was caused by verbs with /s/ in onset
and /ɛ/ as vocal, such as sterva and skeppa. The correct outcome /e:/ was, however, the second most
likely one.
The group with /o:/ as pret.sg. was the one with by far the highest proportion of correct
predictions. Verbs which had attested /o:/ as outcome came from classes 4, 5, 6, and the
85 Nevertheless, the exclusion of nella from the dataset does not lead to a correct prediction. In this case, bihelpa and
jelda are the main influences, neither of which have the expected /e:/ as outcome. This makes clear that it is not
(only) the influence of anomalous nella that causes the incorrect prediction for bifella. The form in general just
appears to diverge too much from other verbs with /e:/ in the pret.sg.
86 See Brandsma (1936: 9) and Eisma & Popkema (1989: 37) for biâda/biede as example.
87 i.e. no rhyme or other vowel similarities.
88 In Modern Frisian, only this verb and litte (< */lǣt-/) follow the same pattern: /ɪ/ - /i.ə/. See Eisma & Popkema
(1989: 74).
41 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
reduplicating class. Falla - <foel> /fo:l/ was predicted correctly, with the alternative /fu:l/ as equally
probable (both 37,8%). This alternative was in fact attested as <ful>, so this was also correct. Both
results were influenced by (in)fara. Finally, the third most likely outcome was /fi:l/, influenced by
halda. Historically speaking, falla belonged to the reduplicating verb class, and as such it had /e:/ in
the pret.sg. in Old Frisian, as did halda. What is remarkable is that in the Early Modern Frisian of
Gysbert Japicx, the verb has reverted to this stage, with an attested form <fiel>. In Modern Frisian,
however, the form is /fu.əl/, similar to that in the Middle Frisian of Jus.89 The program was able to
account for this variation in an elegant way. Also correct was hlâpa - <hloep> /hlo:p/, because of
the marginal similarity of coda /p/ to skeppa and ûrsteppa. More similar was fliâta based on /a:/,
but this verb stood alone and as such its outcome /e:/ came in second.90 Skeppa and ûrsteppa
themselves were predicted correctly mainly because they influenced each other strongly. Standa <stoed/stoeth> /sto:t/ formed a mutually supporting set with (ur)stonda
Drega - <droegh/droech> /dro:x/ was not predicted correctly mainly because of (ont)hêta
and lêta which share the /e:/. An alternative infinitive form would have been draga,91 but the
outcome of this vorm would be predicted incorrectly as /dra:x/ under influence of liâga. For this
reason, there was no justification to add this unattested form to the dataset. Opheffa - <hof ... op>
/ho:f/ was predicted incorrectly as /haf/ under influence of helpa. Also incorrect was nima - <naem>
/na:m/, under influence of a considerable group of class 3 verbs with /ɪ/ - /a/, which prompted /nam/
as the predicted outcome. Koma - <coem/koem/kom> /ko:m/ was predicted incorrectly under
influence of many variants of (prefixed) nima. The predicted outcome /a:/, however, was indeed
attested as <kaem>.92 Slân - <sloech> /slo:x/ was not predicted correctly because of the rhyme with
siân - /sax/. Prefixed variants of slân were not included in the analogical set because they had an
identical context. This negative result extended to these variants, of course, yielding a large number
of wrong predictions for outcome /o:/. Swera - <swoer> /swo:r/ was predicted incorrectly as /swe:r/
through the influence of (tô/weder)spreka. /o:/ was however the second most likely outcome,
influenced by skeppa and ûrsteppa.
89 See Brandsma (1939: 18) for EModFri. and Eisma & Popkema (1989: 40) for MFri. The variation could of course
also be due to dialectal differences rather than language change. Perhaps the Jus forms represent dialectal
innovations that were not present in Japicx' Frisian, but did make it into Modern Frisian in the end.
90 Note that the original vocalism for this type of verb was /io(:)/, so the spelling <hloep> might be a way to represent
this less common vocal cluster. Perhaps a more plausible explanation is given by Jacobs (1899: 128f): if stress
shifted to /o/, /i/ was dropped after /l/, leaving /hlo(:)p/. Influence from class 6 verbs with the alternation /a:/ - /o:/
is also likely (loc. cit.) but not well represented in the dataset of Jus.
91 This form is listed as an alternative infinitive in Buma (...), but without any attestations.
92 The third attested variant was <quam> ?/kwam/, a Middle Dutch influence?
42 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
Apart from these larger groups there were many smaller outcome groups, all of which had
rather low proportions of correct predictions. An immediate explanation for this would be that these
groups all potentially have fewer similar verbs to rely on to make an analogical prediction that
happens to be correct. However, in some cases small mutually strengthening groups, or even pairs,
do occur, as we've seen in the case of hêta and lêta.
5.2.2.2 Preterite plural
As with the preterite singular forms, the correct predictions for the pret.pl. are mainly found in
several larger groups with an above average score:
Outcome
/a/ /a/ weak /ɛ/ /ɪ/
Predicted
0/1
0/2
/o/
0/6 0/1 7/10
/u/ weak /a:/
0/1
/e:/
/i:/ /io:/ /o:/ Total
0/4 9/16 0/3
2/2 8/20 26/66
correctly
(39,4%)
Table 4: Number of pret.pl. outcomes predicted correctly out of total amount of attested outcomes,
per outcome type.
In general the same findings apply to the pret.pl. predictions as to the pret.sg., in the sense that we
find a number of verb groups that support each other analogically, while others are too dissimilar to
other verbs with the same outcome for a correct prediction to be made. 93 Because these same
findings apply, not every verb will be treated on an individual basis; only a broad indication will be
given in this section of the larger groups that were found, but if a particular verb shows interesting
results, it will be treated separately.
The /o/ group contained a number of mutually strengthening groups, such as (bi)fiochta and
sionga on the one hand, and sionga, bitwinga, and bikringa on the other, as well as the pairs jelda,
werda and werda, werpa, all of which influenced each other's correct predictions.
The /e:/ verbs included class 1 verbs such as blîwa, (be)drîva, and krîga, which support each
other. The same goes for skiâ and fliâ, and fliâga, as well as the pair hêta, lêta, which we've also
seen in the pret.sg.
A short mention must go to the two class Ib verbs with /io:/, in this case bliûwa and skriûwa.
Both verbs were predicted correctly, each influencing the other. The second most likely outcome
93 Again, few phonologically similar verbs could be found in such cases.
43 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
was the regular class I /e:/ in both cases, which was an existing alternative for many of these 1b
verbs.
The /o:/ group was also relatively successful, having siân, jân, and (nether)slân as a group.
Falla <foelen> was predicted correctly, though the outcome /u:/ was equally likely. Originally, this
verb from the reduplicating class would have had /e:/, but it has taken over /o:/ from class VI verbs,
according to Jacobs.94 The modelling seems to confirm this, for the /o:/ and /u:/ outcomes are taken
from class VI bifara and fara, respectively. The verb retains this vocalism to this day, along with
stappa.95 The final correct predictions were skeppa and bifara. Variants of nima and koma were all
predicted wrongly because short /o/ was predicted instead of /o:/, under influence of class III and
IV verbs with consonantal clusters in the coda. A possible explanation is that the vowel was
lengthened before the single consonant in nima and koma, but not before clusters, a distinction
which is not emphasised very strongly in the description of the verbs.
5.2.2.3 Preterite participle
Outcome
/a/
/a/
/ɛ/
weak
Predicted 2/10
correctly
0/1
/ɛ/
/ɪ/
/o/
/u/ /a:/
/e:/ /i:/
weak
12/3
2
0/1
/i:/
/io:/ /o:/
Total
weak
5/1 31/3 0/3 5/19 2/17 1/5
5
5
0/1
1/5 0/7 59/151
(39,1%)
Table 5: Number of pret. part. outcomes predicted correctly out of total amount of attested
outcomes, per outcome type.
Out of the verb forms modelled, the preterite participle had the lowest correct prediction rate of all,
despite having the largest dataset. In addition, the vast majority of correct predictions can be found
in a few large groups. First of all, there are the part. forms with /o/, nearly all of which were
predicted correctly. For /ɛ/ and /ɪ/ about a third of the outcomes was predicted correctly. As with the
pret.pl. results above, these results will be treated more briefly than the pret.sg. ones, because the
same findings apply in general.
The most conspicuous group of outcomes is no doubt /o/, the group with the highest rate of
correct predictions encountered out of all the modellings. Within this group there are several
94 Jacobs (1899: 120).
95 Eisma & Popkema (1989: 71).
44 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
subgroups of verbs that are similar to each other and form a mutually strengthening analogical
group. The first two are class III verbs with /ɪ/, including finda, biginna, bitwinga and winna, and
class III verbs with /ɛ/, such as delva, bifella and werda, werpa. Then there are multiple prefixed
variants of both koma and fiochta, which form a similar group.
The /ɛ/ group contains verbs from many different classes, with a number of clear subgroups
in which the verbs support each other, such as bera, skera, swera; kiâsa/tziâsa, fer/urliâsa, biniâta.
A remarkable form is the pret. part. <fenzen> of fân,96 Because of the infinitive's contracted form (<
*fanhan), variants of slân and tiân are treated as similar verbs, yielding a wrong prediction of /a:/.
Werpa - <werpen> was not predicted correctly, in favour of the abovementioned <worpen>. It was
the second most likely outcome however, and the same applies to <a twa werpen> from atwâwerpa.
The correct predictions in the /ɪ/ group are located within one mutually strengthening group
containing variants of breka and reka. Spreka also contributed to these correct predictions, but was
itself predicted wrongly with an /e:/ under influence of steka. For these forms, such as breka <britzen>, it is worth noting the palatalised /ʦ/ < /k/.97
5.2.2.4 Preliminary conclusions
Concerning the modelling of the Middle Frisian strong verb system as a whole, several successful
elements can be pinpointed, as well as a number of problems. First of all, the issue of the proportion
of correct predictions needs to be treated briefly. As was noted at the beginning of this section,
contrary to many modelling experiments, a high rate of success was not to be expected here, as it
would suggest rule-like behaviour, which is not normally assumed for irregular verbs. All the same,
a system might be imagined where every form is perfectly predictable through analogical
comparison with other verbs, yet where no general hard and fast rules apply.98 This, however, we do
not find for Middle Frisian. What do we make of a correct prediction rate of around 40% on
average? It suggests that while there is a considerable number of groups of verbs that support each
other's analogical predictability (such as the class 1 alternation /i:/ - /e:/ - /e:/ - /i/), the majority of
verbs belongs to groups that are too small to compensate for the analogical influence of larger
96 The same applied to bifân - <bifenzen> and ontfân/undfân - <ontfenzen/ontfensen/vnd fenzen>. These verbs also
have <bifaen> and <ontfaen>, though, which were predicted correctly.
97 Jacobs (1899: 95) explains the /ɪ/ by way of the raising of /ɛ/ either under influence of the following affricate, or
the following /i/.
98 Except for the 'rule' of analogy of course.
45 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
groups, or simply are too divergent in form to allow for analogies close enough for correct
prediction.
It should be noted that there are a number of factors that might negatively influence the
correct prediction rate as well. As we have seen, in some cases the correct outcome was predicted as
(for example) second most likely. In the case of less frequent variant forms such as koma - /ko:m/
(besides main variant /ka:m/) this leads to only one correct prediction, when in fact both outcomes
are attested and predicted, with the latter just being the most likely one. This is because in the
output file, only the most likely prediction is taken as the outcome.
In some cases, the difference between a long and a short vowel might be phonologically
determined, e.g. lengthening of the vowel before certain consonants, but not before others.
Differences between a long and short vowel in the outcome could be considered artificial in cases
like the part. pret. of ûtskiâta, where we find both <ut scheten> and <wth schettena>, but only one
of them could ever be predicted correctly, for the reason mentioned in the previous paragraph.
Additionally, a larger corpus/dataset might lead to slightly better prediction rate, especially
in the case of verbs that aren't part of a larger group with the same ablaut pattern. The larger the
dataset, the greater the chance of including rare verbs that might positively influence the prediction
for other verbs.
Finally, a factor that possibly plays a role in some cases is the distinction between the
infinitive form and the present form. To use the analogical model, a single description of each verb
type needs to be made, which is assumed to be the default form as it is stored in the lexicon. For the
purposes of this research, this was the infinitive form, but one could also argue that the present
tense (3.sg.) is the default form, by virtue of it being the most frequent in many kinds of texts.99
There are verbs, however, which have undergone significant phonological development in their
infinitive forms, so that it no longer reflects the consonantal structure present in other forms of the
same verb. Examples include fân < *fanhan, slân < *slahan, and tiâ < *teuha-. In these cases, using
a present or reconstructed form as basis for the description could yield better results.100
The preliminary conclusion for this part of the research is then that analogy – as modelled
by the AM program using these variables – could play a moderate role in strong verb system of
99 It is not clear whether this is also the case for Jus; it seems Buma (...) only noted present forms in the dictionary
when they were somehow divergent from the infinitive.
100 The part. form <fanghen> (from fân), for example, is predicted correctly when the description is based on /faŋ-/,
but not when it is based on the actual infinitive /fa:n/. The variant <fenzen>, mentioned above, is never predicted
correctly.
46 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
Middle Frisian. As a result of the current modelling, it is speculated that analogy is a reliable
method of prediction for roughly half of the strong verbs, most of which belong to groups with
multiple verb types that all share a relatively high amount of phonological features, or even rhyme
with one another.
5.2.3 Diachronic modelling of interparadigmatic strong verb changes between
Middle Frisian and Early Modern Frisian
The next step in the research was the modelling of diachronic changes assumed to be based on
analogy. To investigate this, I selected a group of interparadigmatic changes attested between the
Middle and Early Modern Frisian periods, represented by Jus and Gysbert Japicx' works101
respectively. These changes come in two types. The first is a change of ablaut, generally described
as a shift of class, but sometimes involving only a part of the alternation paradigm. The second type
is what has been described as 'strengthening' of weak verbs above: verbs that were weak or absent
in Old/Middle Frisian are found as strong verbs in Early Modern Frisian.102 Note that the predictions
for the strengthened verbs are restricted to what type of ablaut the verb would have if it were a
strong verb. Whether or not the strengthening itself can be analogically predicted is a question that
cannot be answered in the present study, as mentioned above.
The purpose of the modelling is to find out whether analogy can predict the new outcomes,
based on the dataset of the earlier language phase. As such, the dataset in this research phase is
identical to that of the previous one. Modellings were made of the preterite singular and preterite
participle. The preterite plural was ignored here because its vocalism is equal to the preterite
singular in all cases in this stage (EModFri.) of the language. In contrast to the previous section,
here the verbs will be treated on an individual basis in order to fully analyse the way in which
analogical change is modelled and predicted.
First up is Early Modern Frisian ijtte 'to eat'.103 At this stage of the language, this verb can be
said to belong to class I, with the ablaut <ij> - <ye> - <y> in the infinitive, pret.sg. and part.
101 As described in Brandsma (1936).
102 'Weakening' of strong verbs did also occur, of course, but will not be modelled in this particular study because the
dataset consists solely of strong verbs.
103 Phonological transcriptions of the Early Modern Frisian forms will not be given, because the precise orthography
of Gysbert Japicx' work has not been established. Feitsma (1974) investigates many of the graphematic aspects of
Japicx' writings, but does not stipulate phonemic values for the different graphemes. In any case, a broad
interpretation of GJ's vowel spelling is sufficient for the purposes of this research.
47 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
respectively, from Old Frisian /i:/ - /e:/ - /i/, which is equivalent to that of original class I verbs.
Presumably <ye> represents the falling diphthong /iə/, as in Modern Frisian, or an early stage
thereof. The verb itself derives from OFri. eta/ita, which was in class 5, and had a pret.sg. with
/e/, /e:/ or /a:/.104 Because no infinitive or pres. ind. forms of eta or ita were attested in Jus, both
were tested, with both a long and a short interpretation of the vowel, i.e. /e/, /e:/, /i/ and /i:/.105
Regardless of whether the Middle Frisian form is considered to be /e/, /e:/ or /i:/, the
predicted result for the pret.sg. is always /e:/, which – after applying the regular phonological
change – corresponds to EModFri. <ye>, and is thus the correct prediction. The prediction for part.
vowel was also /e:/ in all cases, which does not directly correspond to to EModFri. <y>. Rather, /i/
or /i:/ would have been the expected outcome here. However, in OFri. there was a variation of /e/,
/e:/, /i/. /i:/ in the part. of class 1.106 In Jus, we mainly find /e:/, with a smattering of /i(:)/ as well. In
GJ <y> is present everywhere in this type of verb,107 so apparently his Frisian is based on a dialect
where /i/, rather than the /e:/ of Jus, was – or had become – the default form for the part. of class 1.
Assuming that this is true, the <y> could also have been based on analogy with class 1 verbs.
The only wrong prediction for the pret.sg. was made when the infinitive is described as /ita/.
In this case, the outcome predicted is /at/, under influence of verbs such as twinga and nima. It is
more difficult to explain the actual development of the verb to GJ's form if we assume the verb had
kept the short /i/ in the infinitive, because this would lead to the /a/ mentioned just now. Instead, it
seems more likely that GJ's <ijtte> derives either directly from /eta/, /e:ta/ or /i:ta/, or from an /ita/
with open syllable lengthening to /i:ta/. The latter two scenarios have my preference, because they
alone correspond directly to the phonological structure of class 1.
To sum up, there is a strong analogical basis for the shift ita/eta from class 5 to 1, especially
in the case of a phonological structure /i:ta/.
The next case is that of prieuwe 'to taste', which was weak in OFri. (prôvia) and unattested in Jus.
At some point between Old and Early Modern Frisian, perhaps while still having a weak inflection,
the verb must have gotten a phonological form like /priuw-/. Assuming that this is indeed the case,
this form was taken as the MFri. point of departure. The predictions for this form were /e:/ in the
104 Jacobs (1899: 99).
105 Eta and ita, with short vowels, are generally named as the infinitives of this verb. Jacobs (loc. cit.) also lists îta,
with long /i:/, though, so all short and long variants were tested, to be sure of all possible results of the modelling.
106 Jacobs (1899: 59ff).
107 Excluding so called class 1b, with /i:/ before /v, w/, where an accent shift caused /iw/ > /iuw/ > /ju:, jow/.
48 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
pret.sg and /jo/ in the part., each result having the other as second alternative. In other words,
exclusively class I forms were predicted, which was also the actual outcome: Japicx' prieuwe is
classified as class Ib by Brandsma (1936: 8). The reason that /jo/ (class Ib) was more probable in
the part. is that more attestations with /jo/ were made in Jus in the part. than in the pret.sg.108 Since
prieuwe is most similar to those Ib verbs – even rhyming with them – it is no surprise that it joined
that group. In this case as well the AM research was able to predict the evolution of the verb.
Class I, though a prominent phenomenon even in most all modern Germanic languages, wasn't the
only group of verbs to attract new members. EModFri. klincke 'to sound' and blincke 'to shine,
gleam' were both not present as strong verbs in OFri, but were grouped in class IIIa for EmodFri. by
Brandsma (1936: 11), with <i> - <o> - <o> as alternation. 109 This goes back to OFri. /i/ - /a/ - /u/,
the latter two having been conflated into /o/ afterwards.110 For both verbs, /a/ and /o/ were predicted
for pret.sg and part. respectively, which corresponds closely to the actual development, in particular
because the /a/ was influenced by class 3 verbs like drinka and springa. The development of these
verbs can therefore be explained as an analogical change.
A case of partial strengthening is exemplified by EModFri. decke 'to cover'. This verb was weak
thekka in OFri., but we find the strong part. form <ditsen> in GJ's writings.111 Once again, this is
also predicted by the AM program, which yields /i/ under influence of verbs like breka and spreka.
A strong preterite form was not attested in GJ, but the form predicted by the AM program was /e:/,
which is the normal form for these /-ɛk-/ verbs, which would then have developed into <ie> or <y>
in EModFri.112 Indeed, dekke in ModFri. has fully joined this group, and is inflected in the same
way as brekke, sprekke, trekke, etc.113 In short, the predictions for decke were in line with actual
developments between MFri. and ModFri.
A group of four verbs is described by Brandsma (1936: 10) as having totally or partially moved
108 For example, typical (later) 1b verbs such as skrîva and blîwa were only attested with /e:/ in the pret.sg, while the
/jo/ forms are attested in the (more often used) part. It is likely that a larger corpus from the Middle Frisian period
would also have yielded the alternative /jo/ forms.
109 Blincke actually had the class 2 weak form blinckje as infinitive in GJ, but the strong pret. form blonck was also
attested. See Brandsma (1936: 49).
110 There are some exceptions, such as /u/ before assimilated /nd/ > /nn/. See Brandsma (1936: 11f).
111 Brandsma (1936: 13f). As mentioned above, /k/ was palatalised before /i, j/ in Old Frisian, yielding forms like
bretsin/britsen 'broken'.
112 loc. cit.
113 Eisma & Popkema (1989: 71f).
49 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
from class 5 to 2. The first is bidde 'to pray', which follows the class 2 pattern with <bea> and
<bean>, allegedly through analogy with biâda. This was not predicted correctly by the AM
program, which mainly saw similarities with other /-ɪ-/ verbs, resulting in predictions mostly
pointing towards typical class 3 vocalism with /a/ in the pret. and /o/ in the part. Biâda was in the
analogical set, but its similarity to bidda was not as great according to my description of the former
as /bja:d-/. If biâda truly served as the target analogue for bidda, then it is one of few cases where
consonantal similarity seems more important than rhyme.114 Even if the description were altered to
place more emphasis on the consonant structure, the influence of biâda would most likely still be
outstripped by that of the /-ɪ-/ verbs.
For the verb forjitte, the strong part. form forjitten was found in GJ. Brandsma (1936: 10)
takes this as evidence that the verb has shifted to class 2, where the regular part. pret. vocal is /ɛ/,
but this is inconclusive, because the its original class 5 also has /ɛ/. Perhaps Brandsma made this
conclusion because forjitte did indeed shift wholly towards a class 2 equivalent (/ɪ/ - /ɪə/ - /ɛ/)in
ModFri.,115 but since no preterite forms were attested in GJ, this seems premature. Be that as it may,
for the part. pret. the AM program did indeed predict /ɛ/ as the most probable outcome, with the
attested /ɪ/ in second place, both of which can be considered more or less correct. As pret.sg.
form, /e:/ was predicted, which does not correspond to the expected /a:/ > EModFri. <ea> for class
2 verbs. Like bidda, this verb poses some problems for the model, because there are no clear source
analogues, except for jiette (loc. cit.), which was not attested in Jus, however, and therefore not part
of the dataset. The same conclusions apply to EModFri. miette 'to measure', which was attested in
GJ as part. perf. <metten> and <mietten> (loc. cit.).
Finally, there is sjean, from Old Frisian siân. The most probable outcome as predicted by the
AM program for the pret.sg. was /o:/, mainly under influence of four different variants of slân. In
second place was /a:/ under influence of a larger group of class 2 /-ja:-/ verbs, such as biâda. Both
can be said to be more or less correct, because GJ in fact shows two alternatives <seag> (< /sa:x/)
and <sjoe> (< /sjo:də/). In the case of the part. pret., only /a:/ was predicted, which is not correct. In
fact, the form attested in GJ is <sjoen>, a form that corresponds to the others with <oe>, from
OFri. /sjo:n/. The origin of this part. form with /o:/ is not totally clear. The preterite forms are
plausible based on analogy with class 6 verbs such as slân and stân, which however have /a:/ forms
in the part. Perhaps some process of intraparadigmatic analogical change took place here, where a
114 Another possibility is that two verbs were intermingled or confused with one another because the part. forms were
sometimes identical: /ba:dən/.
115 Brandsma (1936: 10) and Eisma & Popkema (1989: 73).
50 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
preterite vowel spread to the participle as well. In ModFri. only the <ea> form remains in the pret.,
while <oe> is still the normal participle vocalism, rendering it a verb with a unique alternation
pattern in that language.116
In all, we can conclude that the AM program was at least moderately successful in modelling the
diachronic developments of these verbs.
116 Eisma & Popkema (1989: 71).
51 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
6. Conclusion
Even a cursory glance at the evolution of strong verbs in some of the Germanic languages yields a
great many examples of morphological changes. Most of those changes can be grouped into a few
categories, which creates a clearer perspective on what types of change we encounter in verb
paradigm morphology. One type of change deals with the connection of consonantal stem
morphemes with particular vowel morphemes that carry tense information, or in other words, what
vowel morphemes are used for which tense for a particular verb. These changes result into a verb's
'shift' from one ablaut pattern to another. The second type of change has to do with the presence or
absence of affixation to mark tense. Traditionally strong verbs don't have a dental suffix, while
weak verbs do.117 Certain verbs can lose or gain such affixation, however, in a process which we
may call strengthening or weakening, respectively. These two types of change most often go hand in
hand, with weakening verbs losing ablaut, and strengthening verbs gaining it, though there are some
exceptions to this tendency. A third type of change involves a change in the consonantal structure of
the verb's stem morpheme. The presence of semi-vocalic phonemes – such as /j/ in Swedish bjuda –
in the stem can sometimes trigger a reanalysis of the consonant structure which causes these
phonemes to spread to tenses where they were previously absent.
Another distinction can be made concerning the location of the source analogues in cases
where an analogical cause for the change can be assumed. If the source analogue can be found
within the same paradigm as the target analogue, we can call it intraparadigmatic change. If the
source is in one or multiple paradigms of other verbs, it is interparadigmatic. Often, a change will
originate in one or a small number of verbs, due to some phonological change or reanalysis, and
subsequently spread to similar verbs in an analogical process. Thus, there always seems to be an
interplay between intra- and interparadigmatic factors.
Though analogical processes are possibly present in intraparadigmatic change, especially if
levelling is explained as a change involving analogical comparison, the role of analogy is clearest in
interparadigmatic changes, where there is a strong interaction between different verbs that share
certain features. Therefore, these changes were most suitable for analysis using an analogical
model. Using Skousen's Analogical Modeling program, I examined a dataset consisting of Middle
117 To say that strong verbs lack affixation altogether would be too simple. The past participle almost always has an
/-n/ suffix or derivative thereof, and it is well known that Modern German and Dutch mark the participle with the
prefix ge-, traces of which are present in various Old West Germanic languages as well.
52 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
Frisian strong verbs.
The first part of the research was based on a modelling of the entire strong verb dataset at
once, looking for analogical connections between the verbs. In roughly 35 tot 40% of the verbs, the
AM model was able to predict the correct form of ablaut, based on the description of the verbs as
given by the researcher. Taking into account possible later refinements in the dataset, as well as
some of the limitations of the AM program,118 I estimate that approximately 50% of the ablaut forms
can be predicted correctly by an analogical model such as AM, based purely on analogical
comparison of phonological features between verbs.119 The vast majority of the forms predicted
correctly belonged to larger groups of verbs that shared a number of phonological features, most
often involving the stem vowel and the post-nucleus consonantal structure. These groups are of
course reminiscent of, and often overlap with, the traditional ablaut classes used for the
categorisation of strong verbs.
The overall results also indicate that there are difficulties with attempting to explain the
synchronic morphological patterns of the strong verbs purely by analogical relationships. A further
refinement of verb descriptions, as well as the ability to add a weighting to variables and a
frequency value to contexts, would perhaps yield better results, but not all of these features can be
easily implemented using the current version of the AM program. The use of a rigid text array for
the entry of variables prevents a more flexible linking of variables to be compared with each other,
and there is no way to weight variables, except through duplication of the variable and its values.
The same goes for dataset entries and frequency. In this sense, the AM program is more suitable for
the modelling of less complex morphological processes that do not involve entire verbal paradigms
and multiple outcomes.
The results in the diachronic part of the research were more encouraging, yielding entirely
correct predictions for about half of the verb changes modelled, and partially correct results for
most of the others. Some of the changes involved were purely interparadigmatic shifts in ablaut,
some others also involved strengthening. The results are interpreted as follows: assuming that these
verbs were strong, or had a tendency to become strong because of similarity to some strong verbs,
the AM program was able to predict fairly accurately what kind of strong ablaut the verb would
118 Such as the counting of alternative, less likely outcomes as incorrect, even though they are attested. Only one
'correct' outcome is available per context. The program itself cannot make subtle distinctions between main and
alternative forms.
119 The only non-phonological variable specified was the amount of syllables in the verbal infinitive, to distinguish
between regular and contracted verbs.
53 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
receive. This indicates that analogy plays a strong role in the switching of strong verbs to different
ablaut patterns, and the assignment of a pattern to strengthening verbs. The likelihood of
strengthening of the verbs that actually strengthened compared to that of the verbs that didn't could
not be investigated here, because the dataset did not contain any weak verbs120. It is possible that
analogical similarities between strong verbs and weak verbs might cause the former to weaken, and
vice versa. Modelling a dataset that contains both strong and weak verbs would be a way to
investigate this. However, since it is likely that frequency plays a role in the weakening of verbs,121
it seems best to do such an investigation with a model and program that handles frequency data
more easily than AM does.
To conclude, the most important findings of this thesis are the following: First of all, the
overall results of the synchronic modelling of Middle Frisian strong verbs in section 5.2.2 show that
there are groups of verbs, the members of which have strong analogical ties to each other. This
would allow a speaker to predict a certain form, based purely on analogical comparison to similar
verbs. Nevertheless, approximately half of the verbs in the dataset investigated, proved to be too
dissimilar from other verbs for the AM program to make reliable predictions.What also became
clear is that the stem vowel and the post-vocalic consonant structure (which together form the
rhyme) are quite influential compared to other parts of a verb's phonological structure. The AM
program showed better overall results when the rhyme was emphasised in the verb description than
when it wasn't. Finally, the modelling of diachronic developments in section 5.2.3 showed that these
changes for the most part can indeed be considered analogical changes, and that the AM program
was able to predict them with a very decent accuracy.
These results, some modest, some encouraging, indicate that there lies much opportunity in
the modelling of (analogical) language change. Rather than using analogy as a catch-all for changes
that can't quite be explained in another way, the challenge is to make analogy quantifiable. I predict
that interesting results will be found in future research. This can be done through extension of such
modellings to other Germanic languages, as well as extensions of the AM program to include
frequency data that may be essential to the modelling of some changes.
120 Though it did include a few strong verbs with attested weak forms.
121 See Lieberman et al. (2007).
54 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
List of References and Used Literature
Anttila, Raimo (1977). Analogy. The Hague, etc.: Mouton.
Anttila, Raimo (2003). “Analogy: The Warp and Woof of Cognition.” In: Joseph, Brian D. & Janda,
Baayen, Rolf Harald (2006). Woorden Onder Elkaar. Geheugen en predictie bij spreken, verstaan
en lezen. [Oration, Radboud University Nijmegen, 3 february 2006]. Amsterdam: Koninklijke
Nederlandse Academie van Wetenschappen.
Bloomfield, Leonard (1933 [19582]). Language. London: George Allen & Unwin.
Boer, R.C. (1920). Oudnoorsch Handboek. Haarlem: H.D. Tjeenk Willink & Zoon.
Brandsma, Wytze Lammert (1936). Het werkwoord bij Gysbert Japic. Assen: Van Gorcum &
Comp.
Bremmer, Rolf H. Jr. (2009 [2002Ms]). An Introduction to Old Frisian. Amsterdam, etc.: Benjamins.
Buma, Wybren Jan (1996). Vollständiges Wörterbuch zum westerlauwersschen Jus Municipale
Frisonum. Ljouwert: Fryske Akademy.
Chapman, Don & Skousen, Royal (2005). “Analogical Modelling and morphological change: the
case of the adjectival negative prefix in English.” In: English Language and Linguistics 9:2.
pp. 333-357.
Chomsky, N. & Halle, M. (1968 [1991]). The Sound Pattern of English. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Coetsem, Frans van (1990). Ablaut and Reduplication in the Germanic Verb. Heidelberg: Carl
Winter.
Enger, Hans-Olav (1998). The classification of strong verbs in Norwegian with special reference to
the Oslo dialect. A study in inflectional morphology. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Enger, Hans-Olav (2004). “A possible constraint on non-affixal inflection.” In: Lingua 114. pp. 5975.
Feitsma, Anthonia (1974). De autografemen in het werk van Gysbert Japicx. Een verkennend
grafematisch onderzoek naar de taal van Gysbert Japicx en een bijdrage tot de Friese
spellinggeschiedenis. Leeuwarden: Koperative Utjowerij Ljouwert. [PhD Dissertation Vrije
Universiteit Amsterdam].
Fitch, W. Tecumseh (2007). “An Invisible Hand.” In: Nature 449 (11th October 2007). pp. 665-667.
55 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
Grimm, Jacob (1837 [18932]). Deutsche Grammatik: Erster Theil. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann.
Hogg, Richard M. (1988). “Snuck: The Development of Irregular Preterite Forms.” In: Nixon,
Graham & Honey, John (eds.). An Historic Tongue: Studies in English Linguistics in Memory
of Barbara Straug. London / New York: Routledge. pp. 31-40.
Holyoak, Keith J. & Thagard, Paul (1995). Mental Leaps. Analogy in Creative Thought. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
Jacobs, Jozef (1899). Vormleer van het Oudfriesch Werkwoord. Gent: A. Siffer.
Johnston, Thomas S.B. (2001). “The Old Frisian Law Manuscripts and Law Texts.” In: Munske,
Horst Haider et al. (ed.). Handbuch des Friesischen. Handbook of Frisian Studies. Tübingen:
Niemeyer. pp. 571-587.
Krygier, Marcin (1994). The Disintegration of the English Strong Verb System. Frankfurt am Main,
etc.: Peter Lang.
Lieberman, Erez & Michel, Jean-Baptiste & Jackson, Joe & Tang, Tina & Nowak, Martin A.
(2007). “Quantifying the evolutionary dynamics of language.” In: Nature 449 (11th October
2007). pp. 713-716.
Lundberg, Justus (1921). Studier över andra starka verbalklassen i nysvenskan. Med hänsyn tagen
även till övriga starka verbalklasser. [PhD Dissertation, Lund University].
Mailhammer, Robert (2007a). The Germanic Strong Verbs: Foundations and Development of a New
System. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Mailhammer, Robert (2007b). “Islands of Resilience: the history of the German strong verbs from a
systemic
point
of
view.”
In:
Morphology
17:1.
pp.
77-108.
<http://indoeuropean.dnghu.org/german_strong_verbs.pdf>
McCarthy, John J. (1981). “A Prosodic Theory of Nonconcatenative Morphology.” In: Linguistic
Inquiry 12 (1981:3). pp. 373-418.
McClelland, James L. & Patterson, Karalyn (2002a). “Rules or connections in past-tense
inflections: what does the evidence rule out?” In: TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences 6, no. 11.
pp. 465-472.
McClelland, James L. & Patterson, Karalyn (2002b). “'Words or Rules' cannot exploit the regularity
in exceptions.” In: TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences 6, no. 11. pp. 464-465.
Pagel, Mark & Atkinson, Quentin D. & Meade, Andrew (2007). “Frequency of word-use predicts
rates of lexical evolution throughout Indo-European history.” In: Nature 449 (11th October
56 / 65
Oscar Strik. “Modeling Analogical Change: A Look at Germanic Strong Verb Evolution.”
MA Thesis – Research MA Linguistics – Universiteit van Amsterdam
2007). pp. 717-720.
Pinker, Steven (1999). Words and Rules. The Ingredients of Language. London: Orion.
Pinker, Steven & Ullman, Michael T. (2002a). “The past and future of the past tense.” In: TRENDS
in Cognitive Sciences 6, no. 11. pp. 456-463.
Pinker, Steven & Ullman, Michael T. (2002b). “Combination and structure, not gradedness, is the
issue. Reply to McClelland and Patterson.” In: TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences 6, no. 11. pp.
472-474.
Price, H. T. (1910). A History of Ablaut in the Strong Verbs from Caxton to the End of the
Elizabethan Period. Bonn: Peter Hanstein.
Saussure, Ferdinand de (1959 [1966]). Course in General Linguistics. [Translated by Wade Baskin].
New York / Toronto / London: McGraw-Hill.
Seebold, Elmar (1970). Vergleichendes und Etymologisches Wörterbuch der Germanischen
Starken Verben. The Hague / Paris: Mouton.
Skousen, Royal (1989). Analogical Modeling of Language. Dordrecht / Boston / London: Kluwer
Academic Publishing.
Skousen, Royal & Lonsdale, Deryle & Parkinson, Dilworth B. (eds.) (2002). Analogical Modeling.
An exemplar based approach to language. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Strik, Oscar (2006, unpublished). “Inndelinga av sterke verb i bokmål.” Paper Research Master
Linguistics, Universiteit van Amsterdam.
Tiersma, Pieter Meijes (1985 [19992]). Frisian Reference Grammar. Ljouwert: Fryske Akademy.
Venås, Kjell (1967). Sterke verb i norske målføre. Morfologiske studiar. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.
Venås, Kjell (1974). Linne verb i norske målføre. Morfologiske studiar. Oslo / Bergen / Tromsø:
Universitetsforlaget.
Versloot, Arjen P. (2004). “Why Old Frisian Is Still Quite Old.” In: Folia Linguistica Historica
XXV/1-2. pp. 253-298.
Versloot, Arjen P. (2008). Mechanisms of Language Change. Vowel Reduction in 15th Century West
Frisian. Utrecht: LOT.
Vriendt, S.F.L. De (1965). Sterke Werkwoorden en Sterke Werkwoordsvormen in de 16e Eeuw.
[Brussel]: Belgisch Interuniversitair Centrum voor Neerlandistiek.
Wełna, Jerzy (1996). English Historical Morphology. Warsaw: Wydawnictwa Universytetu
Warszawskiego.
57 / 65
Appendix 1: Middle Frisian Dataset
Given below is the dataset (in spreadsheet format) that was used to run the AM program in chapter 5. To model a particular tense (e.g. pret.sg.), that
outcome column was retained, while the other outcome columns were deleted. The remaining columns were then transformed into a plain text file
called “data” that served as input for the AM program. In the research of section 5.2.2, the test”file, called “test”, was equivalent to the data file.
Some verbs are entered into the dataset more than once, to allow room to specify alternative forms.
pret sg pret pl part ,
,
i:st ,
e:st
e:st
,
jost
,
e:st
e:st ,
e:st
e:st
,
jost ,
e:st ,
jost ,
jost ,
i:st ,
i:st
,
e:st
e:st
,
e:st
,
e:st
.ist ,
.est ,
e:st ,
e:st
,
e:st
e:st ,
e:st
,
jost
jost
jost ,
jost ,
i:st ,
i:st ,
onset1 onset2 onset3 nucleus1 nucleus2 coda1 coda2 coda3 voc2 voc2 last C root syllables ,
,
b
=
=
i
i
t
0
=
i
i
t
2
,
b
l
=
i
i
w
0
=
i
i
w
2
,
b
l
=
i
u
w
0
=
u
u
w
2
,
d
r
=
i
i
w
0
=
i
i
w
2
,
d
r
=
i
i
w
0
=
i
i
w
2
,
d
r
=
i
i
w
0
=
i
i
w
2
,
d
r
=
i
i
w
0
=
i
i
w
2
,
d
r
=
i
i
w
0
=
i
i
w
2
,
d
r
=
i
u
w
0
=
u
u
w
2
,
g
r
=
i
i
p
0
=
i
i
p
2
,
h
n
=
i
i
G
0
=
i
i
G
2
,
k
r
=
i
i
G
0
=
i
i
G
2
,
l
=
=
i
i
d
0
=
i
i
d
2
,
r
=
=
i
i
d
0
=
i
i
d
2
,
s
=
=
i
i
p
0
=
i
i
p
2
,
s
=
=
i
i
p
0
=
i
i
p
2
,
s
k
=
i
i
n
0
=
i
i
n
2
,
s
k
r
i
i
w
0
=
i
i
w
2
,
s
k
r
i
i
w
0
=
i
i
w
2
,
s
k
r
i
u
w
0
=
u
u
w
2
,
s
k
r
i
u
w
0
=
u
u
w
2
,
s
m
=
i
i
t
0
=
i
i
t
2
,
s
n
=
i
i
d
0
=
i
i
d
2
,
verb
class
bîta
blîwa
bliûwa
drîva
bedrîva
entwêdrîva
urdrîva
urdrîva
driôwa
bigrîpa
hnîga
krîga
lîtha
rîda
bisîpa
bisîpa
skîna
skrîva
biskrîva
skriûwa
biskriuwa
smîta
ofsnîda
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
e:st
a:st
e:st
e:st
e:st
a:st
e:st
e:st
a:st
a:st
.est
.est
a:st
a:st
a:st
a:st
a:st
a:st
a:st
e:st
.ast
.ast
.ast
.ast
.ost
e:st ,
,
i:w1 ,
a:st ,
e:st ,
e:st ,
a:st ,
,
,
,
,
.est ,
.est ,
o:st ,
.est ,
,
.est ,
,
.est ,
.est ,
.est ,
o:st ,
e:st ,
.est ,
e:st ,
.est ,
,
a:st ,
a:st ,
.ust ,
.ost ,
,
.ost ,
.ost ,
.ost ,
,
.ost ,
.ost ,
.ost ,
s
s
s
b
b
b
b
f
f
f
f
k
k
k
l
l
l
l
l
n
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
t
t
b
b
b
d
d
d
d
f
f
f
n
t
t
j
j
j
j
l
l
l
l
j
j
j
=
j
j
j
j
j
k
k
k
k
l
l
l
j
j
=
=
=
=
=
=
r
=
=
j
=
r
r
=
=
=
=
j
j
j
j
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
j
j
j
j
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
i
i
i
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
u
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
u
u
u
a
a
e
i
i
e
e
e
i
i
i
o
i
i
i
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
u
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
u
u
u
a
a
E
I
I
E
E
E
I
I
I
O
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
0
0
G
t
s
s
s
k
G
s
s
s
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
n
n
r
n
n
l
l
r
N
n
n
X
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
=
=
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
s
d
d
v
v
v
k
d
d
t
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
t
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
i
i
i
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
u
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
u
u
u
a
a
E
I
I
E
E
E
I
I
I
O
i
i
i
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
u
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
u
u
u
a
a
E
I
I
E
E
E
I
I
I
O
d
d
d
d
d
d
d
0
0
G
t
s
s
s
k
G
s
s
s
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
t
n
n
t
d
d
v
v
v
k
d
d
t
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
ofsnîda
strîda
bistrîda
biâda
biâda
urbiâda
urbiâda
fliâ
fliâ
fliâga
fliâta
kiâsa
tziâsa
kiâsa
bilûka
liâga
ferliâsa
forliâsa
urliâsa
biniâta
skiâta
skiâta
ûtskiâta
ûtskiâta
slûta
bislûta
untslûta
tiân
optiân
bersta
binda
anbinda
del(v)a
bidelva
forderva
drinka
finda
bifinda
fiochta
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
.ost
.ast
.uw1
.ast
.ost
.ost
.ost
.ost
.ost
.ost
.uw1
.ust
.ost
.ost
o:st
o:st
o:st
.ost
.ast
.ost
.ost
a:st
.ost
.ost
a:st
.ast
.ost
.ust
.ost
.ast
a:st
.ast
.est
.ast
.ast
.ost
.ast
.est
.ost
.ost
.ost
.ost
.ost
.ost
.est
.ost
.est
.ast
.est
.ost
.est
.ost
.ost
.ost
.est
.ist
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
f
f
f
f
g
g
h
j
j
k
k
k
k
k
k
r
r
r
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
t
t
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
w
j
j
j
j
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
l
r
=
=
=
j
j
k
k
p
p
t
t
w
w
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
r
r
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
o
o
o
o
i
i
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
i
i
e
e
e
o
o
e
e
i
i
e
e
i
i
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
O
O
O
O
I
I
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
I
I
E
E
E
O
O
E
E
I
I
E
E
I
I
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
X
X
X
X
n
n
l
l
l
r
r
r
r
n
N
n
n
n
N
N
l
l
N
N
r
r
N
N
r
r
r
r
r
r
l
r
r
r
r
t
t
t
t
0
0
p
d
d
v
v
v
v
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
d
d
0
0
v
v
0
0
p
p
d
d
d
p
0
p
p
p
d
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
O
O
O
O
I
I
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
I
I
E
E
E
O
O
E
E
I
I
E
E
I
I
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
O
O
O
O
I
I
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
I
I
E
E
E
O
O
E
E
I
I
E
E
I
I
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
t
t
t
t
N
N
p
d
d
v
v
v
v
n
N
n
n
n
N
N
d
d
N
N
v
v
N
N
p
p
d
d
d
p
l
p
p
p
d
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
bifiochta
infiochta
onfiochta
urfiochta
biginna
biginna
bihelpa
jelda
urjelda
kerva
bikerva
ofkerva
tokerva
klinna
bikringa
renna
birenna
on(t)renna
sionga
sionga
biskelda
biskelda
springa
on(t)springa
sterva
sterva
twinga
bitwinga
werpa/worpa
werpa/worpa
werda
werda
werda
atwâwerpa
biwella
omwerpa
opwerpa
twâwerpa
ûrênwertha
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
.ast
.ost
.ost
e:st
e:st
a:st
o:st
o:st
a:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
a:st
a:st
o:st
o:st
a:st
o:st
a:st
e:st
e:st
e:st
a:st
o:st
o:st
e:st
.ost ,
,
.ost ,
.ost ,
.ost ,
.ost ,
.est ,
,
.ist ,
.ist ,
e:st ,
.ist ,
.ist ,
.ew1 ,
.est ,
.ost ,
.ost ,
,
.ost ,
.ost ,
.ost ,
,
.ost ,
,
.ist ,
,
.ist ,
.ist ,
.ist ,
,
,
.ist ,
.ist ,
.est ,
a:st ,
.ist ,
,
,
.est ,
w
w
w
w
w
w
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
f
f
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
r
r
s
s
s
s
s
s
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
r
r
r
r
r
r
r
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
k
l
p
p
p
t
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
r
r
r
=
e
e
i
i
i
i
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
e
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
e
e
e
a
e
e
e
e
E
E
I
I
I
I
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
e
E
E
a
E
E
E
E
r
r
n
n
n
n
r
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
l
l
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
k
k
r
n
k
k
k
l
d
p
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
E
E
I
I
I
I
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
e
E
E
a
E
E
E
E
E
E
I
I
I
I
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
e
E
E
a
E
E
E
E
d
p
n
n
n
n
r
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
l
l
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
k
k
r
n
k
k
k
l
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
urwertha
ûtwerpa
winna/wonna
forwinna
onwinna
ûrwinna
bera
breka
inbreka
ofbreka
tobreka
tobreka
ûtbreka
ûtbreka
bifella
bifella
koma/kuma
koma/kuma
inkoma
om(me)koma
onkoma
undkoma
ûtkoma
nima
nima
anweinima
binima
ofnima
onnima
opnima
urnima
birêka
reka
ofskera
afslân
spreka/spraka
tôspreka
wederspreka
stela
3
3
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
a:st
e:st
e:st
u:st
o:st
o:st
.ast
.est
e:st
e:st
e:st
.ast
o:st
o:st
i:st
i:st
e:st
e:st
.ast
o:st
o:st
u:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
.est , s
.est , s
,b
,b
,b
,j
o:st , j
,j
o:st , j
,l
,l
e:st , s
.est , s
,s
,s
,s
,s
i:st , s
,s
,s
,s
e:st , s
,w
.est , w
.ast , d
.ast , d
a:st , f
,f
,f
e:st , h
,s
a:st , s
a:st , s
a:st , s
,s
a:st , s
,s
a:st , s
a:st , s
t
t
=
=
r
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
j
j
j
k
k
k
p
t
=
=
r
r
=
=
=
=
k
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
j
j
j
r
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
e
e
i
i
e
a
e
e
e
i
i
i
i
i
a
a
a
a
a
a
e
e
e
e
e
e
a
a
a
e
e
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
E
E
I
I
E
a
e
e
e
I
I
I
I
I
a
a
a
a
a
a
E
E
E
E
e
e
A
A
A
E
E
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
l
l
d
d
k
n
v
v
v
d
d
t
t
t
n
n
0
0
0
0
k
k
s
s
G
G
r
r
r
f
p
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
z
z
0
0
0
0
0
=
=
=
=
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
f
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
E
E
I
I
E
a
e
e
e
I
I
I
I
I
a
a
a
a
a
a
E
E
E
E
e
e
A
A
A
E
E
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
E
E
I
I
E
a
e
e
e
I
I
I
I
I
a
a
a
a
a
a
E
E
E
E
e
e
A
A
A
E
E
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
l
l
d
d
k
n
v
v
v
z
z
t
t
t
n
n
0
0
0
0
k
k
s
s
G
G
r
r
r
f
p
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
ferstela
ofstela
bidda
anbidda
undbreka
jâ(n)
forjeva
urjeva
ûtjeva
lidza
lidza
sitta
bisitta
tôsitta
siân
siân
onsiâ
skiâ
skiâ
misskiâ
antwâspreka
steka
wesa
ûtwesa
drega
un(d)drega
fara
bifara
infara
opheffa
skeppa
slân
bislân
forslân
netherslân
ofslân
ommeslân
t(h)ruchslân
toslân
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5/anom
5/anom
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
o:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
o:st
.ost
.ow1
.aw1
.est
.ist
.aw1
.aw1
.est
.est
.est
.ist
.est
o:st
u:st
.est
o:st
e:st
e:st
e:st
i:st
e:st
i:st
.ist
,s
a:st , s
.est , s
,s
,s
,s
,s
.est , s
.est , s
.est , s
,w
.ast , w
e:st , d
e:st , d
,n
.ast , b
.aw1 , b
.ast , b
.ast , b
.est , f
.ast , f
.est , f
a:st , f
,f
.ist , f
.est , f
a:st , f
.est , f
,f
.ast , f
.est , g
.est , g
.ist , g
.ast , h
a:st , h
,h
,h
.ast , h
.ast , h
l
l
t
t
t
t
t
w
w
w
=
=
w
w
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
a
a
a
a
e
o
o
e
e
e
a
a
a
a
e
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
u
u
u
a
a
e
e
a
a
a
a
A
A
E
O
O
E
E
E
A
A
a
a
E
A
A
A
A
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
A
A
U
U
U
a
a
e
e
A
A
n
n
n
n
p
n
n
r
r
r
k
k
n
n
l
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
l
l
N
N
N
w
w
t
t
l
l
0
0
d
d
0
d
d
0
0
0
s
s
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
d
d
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
a
a
A
A
E
O
O
E
E
E
A
A
a
a
E
A
A
A
A
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
A
A
U
U
U
a
a
e
e
A
A
a
a
A
A
E
O
O
E
E
E
A
A
a
a
E
A
A
A
A
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
A
A
U
U
U
a
a
e
e
A
A
n
n
d
d
p
d
d
r
r
r
s
s
N
N
l
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
n
l
l
N
N
N
w
w
t
t
d
d
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
ommeslân
urslân
standa
opstanda
ûrsteppa
undstonda
ûrstonda
swera/swara/swora
biswera
urswera
waxa
opwaxa
fordwân
misdwân
nella
banna
bibanna
onbanna
urbanna
fân
fân
bifân
bifân
offân
onfân
ontfân
ontfân
undfân
falla
falla
gunga
bigunga
bigunga
hâwa
ofhâwa
hêta
onthêta
halda
bihalda
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
anom
anom
anom
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
red
o:st
e:st
e:st
a:st
e:st
a:st
e:st
,
,
,
,
,
h
h
l
r
r
l
l
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
a
a
e
e
e
a
a
e
e
e
p
p
t
d
d
0
0
0
0
0
=
=
=
=
=
a
a
e
e
e
a
a
e
e
e
p
p
t
d
d
2
2
2
2
2
,
,
,
,
,
hlâpa
tôhlâpa
lêta
rêda
rêda
red
red
red
red
red
Appendix 2: Middle Frisian to Early Modern Frisian Test set
This test set was used to describe the verbs that were modelled in section 5.2.3. The data set used in this part of the research was the same as the one
used in section 5.2.2 and described in Appendix 1.
pret sg pret pl part ,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
onset1 onset2 onset3 nucl1 nucl2 coda1 coda2 coda3 voc2 voc2 last C syll. ,
,
=
=
=
e
E
t
0
=
E
E
t
2
,
=
=
=
e
e
t
0
=
E
E
t
2
,
=
=
=
i
i
t
0
=
i
i
t
2
,
p
r
=
i
u
w
0
=
i
u
w
2
,
k
l
=
i
I
N
k
=
I
I
k
2
,
b
l
=
i
I
N
k
=
I
I
k
2
,
d
=
=
e
E
k
0
=
E
E
k
2
,
b
=
=
i
I
d
0
=
I
I
d
2
,
j
=
=
e
E
t
0
=
E
E
t
2
,
m
=
=
e
E
t
0
=
E
E
t
2
,
s
j
=
a
a
n
0
=
a
a
n
1
,
verb
*et*e:t*i:t*priuw*klink*blink*dek*bid*forjet*met*sja:n