论文部分内容阅读
【Abstract】
The development of the relative pronouns that and which in English has been a complex process.Old English used the particle e as a relative pronoun， but into the Middle English period，‘that’ became the most frequently used relative pronoun. Wh- pronouns rose after the pronouns started losing their interrogative qualities. A study on the historical development for ‘that and which” will make us master the usages of attributive clauses better.
【Key words】
attributive clauses；relative pronouns；the antecedent；wh- pronouns
Nowadays the relative pronouns that and which are used to connect a dependent clause and serve as subject or object in the dependent clause. They do so by relating to the antecedent in the sentence. The dependent clause introduced by the relative pronoun is either restrictive or non-restrictive. A restrictive clause provides information that is critical to the understanding of the main clause， whereas a non-restrictive clause provides information that is not critical to the understanding of the main clause. In fact， that and which are widely used interchangeably by many people and contemporary usage guides are less likely to “prescribe” this strict usage. But the usages of ‘that and which’ experienced a long evolution in the different stages of history. Let’s have a further discussion below.
I the heavy functional load of that
Old English used the particle ?e as a relative pronoun， and to a lesser degree， ??t was also used as a relative. The relativde particle ?e was s till actively in use in early Middle English alongside ?at （that as it would have been written then）， but well into the Middle English period， ?at ‘that’ completely replaced ?e and became the most frequently used relative pronoun . This move towards simplification was complicated by the introduction of wh- forms （interrogative pronouns which， who， whose， etc.） in a relative function . Consequently， that would be undermined as the uniform relative marker. Immediately， ?at began to be limited to restrictive clauses when wh- pronouns adopted a relative function .
II the rise of wh- pronouns
The transition from interrogative to relative wh- pronoun began after the pronouns started losing their interrogative qualities in indirect questions . Eventually， the generalizing relative pronouns very obviously referred to an antecedent and adopted a permanent relative function. At the end of the Middle English period， that was the most common adnominal relative link， although which was preferred for non-restrictive clauses. The function of the relative pronoun in the clause played an important role in the choice of its form. That is most resistant to replacement by wh-pronouns in subject position . This means that the spread of wh-pronouns was a top-down change from formal and literary circles of language. Yet， text representing oral usage illustrate the robustness of that despite the rise of wh-pronouns in written language .
III animacy of the antecedent
When which developed as a relative pronoun it was used with either human and nonhuman antecedents. The interrogative ‘which’ still uses both today. The most famous example of which being used with a personal antecedent is the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century example of The Lord’s Prayer， which opens with： eg； “Our father， which art in heauen…”.
In Early Modern English， which was freely used with personal antecedents while who was used occasionally with non-personal antecedents. At this time， the possessive whose could refer to inanimate antecedents mainly because neither which nor that had a possessive form. One-third of which usages occurs with a human antecedent in the sixteenth century， but by the seventeenth century， it is down to one-tenth . The growing change is a reflection of the systematization of the use of various grammatical forms in the course of the Early Modern English period and with the polite expression of Tudor and Stuart society， which probably emphasized the observation of the ‘personality’ of the referent .
Increasingly there was a move to PDE usage as which became increasingly confined to non-personal antecedents. Therefore， in the seventeenth century， an animacy parameter is established and very much resembled PDE usage by the eighteenth century. We should note， however， that a reaction against the ‘dehumanizing’ use of that with human antecedent took place after the end of the eighteenth century . The use of that with a personal antecedent would be replaced by the who form to decrease the functional load of that yet again. Also ， which was still being used with a personal referent by the uneducated at the end of the eighteenth century. Even in educated circles， which was used rather than who for personal referents when the relative has a predicative function.
IV written language vs. spoken language
In Early Tudor times， that was more frequent than who and which combined. By the sixteenth century， that becomes less frequent in formal prose. However， it remains the commonest relative pronoun in informal and colloquial styles. This can be seen in Elizabethan and Jacobean plays that try to give the illusion of contemporary speech， and especially those that are remote from courtliness . It seems likely that the growing dominance of which was typical of a formal literary style. In informal style， and probably in speech， that remained the dominant relative pronoun. The trend continues in the seventeenth century； and in the Restoration period， which is entirely almost entirely confined to non-personal antecedents， and that is largely confined to restrictive clauses . From 1700-1900， that was increasingly used less in written data than which —the change occurred rapidly during the eighteenth century and more gradually in the nineteenth century. In the twentieth century， which is used slightly less than before . Today， North American English prefers that to which in restrictive relative clauses even in written contexts .
V Conclusion
Although the proper use of that and which is described in most grammar guides， there continue to be many “authoritative” texts that do not differentiate between them. Tom Mac Arthur states， “That can be used as a relative pronoun in place of who， whom， or which， except as complement of a preposition： the women who/that I rely on， but only the women on whom I rely” . To contrast， some guides make the opposite choice of being too prescriptive. “Harbrace Handbook for Canadians 5th ed.” makes no distinction between restrictive and non-restrictive clauses； rather， it is more concerned with animacy. The intended audience of a usage guide seems to have a direct influence on the specificity of proper usage. It appears that while there is a prescriptive rule for the proper usage of that and which， the dearth of strict application has been increasingly represented in a leniency toward improper use and an acceptance of interchangeability.
【Reference Books】
[1]Millward， C.M. A Biography of the English Language. [M] Fort Worth： Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers， 1994.
[2]Romaine， Suzanne. “Some Historical and Social Dimensions of Syntactic Change in Middle Scots Relative Clauses.” [M]// N.F. Blake and Charles Jones. English historical linguistics： Studies in development. Eds. Sheffield： University of Sheffield， 1984.
[3]Mustanoja， Tauno F. A Middle English Syntax. [M] Helsinki： Société néophilologique 1960.
[4]Dekeyser， Xavier. “Relativizers in Early Modern English.” A dynamic quantitative study.”
Jacek Fisiak. Historical Syntax. Ed. [M] Berlin： Mouton Publishers， 1984.
[5]Barber， Charles. Early Modern English. [M] Edinburgh： Edinburgh University Press 1997.
[6]Ball， C. “A Diachronic Study of Relative Markers in Spoken and Written English.” [M]//Language Variation and Change 1996.
【作者簡介】
王晓惠（1965___）， 女， 辽宁营口人，副教授，研究方向：英语语言学，工作单位：辽宁营口职业技术学院（老商校院内）外语系。
The development of the relative pronouns that and which in English has been a complex process.Old English used the particle e as a relative pronoun， but into the Middle English period，‘that’ became the most frequently used relative pronoun. Wh- pronouns rose after the pronouns started losing their interrogative qualities. A study on the historical development for ‘that and which” will make us master the usages of attributive clauses better.
【Key words】
attributive clauses；relative pronouns；the antecedent；wh- pronouns
Nowadays the relative pronouns that and which are used to connect a dependent clause and serve as subject or object in the dependent clause. They do so by relating to the antecedent in the sentence. The dependent clause introduced by the relative pronoun is either restrictive or non-restrictive. A restrictive clause provides information that is critical to the understanding of the main clause， whereas a non-restrictive clause provides information that is not critical to the understanding of the main clause. In fact， that and which are widely used interchangeably by many people and contemporary usage guides are less likely to “prescribe” this strict usage. But the usages of ‘that and which’ experienced a long evolution in the different stages of history. Let’s have a further discussion below.
I the heavy functional load of that
Old English used the particle ?e as a relative pronoun， and to a lesser degree， ??t was also used as a relative. The relativde particle ?e was s till actively in use in early Middle English alongside ?at （that as it would have been written then）， but well into the Middle English period， ?at ‘that’ completely replaced ?e and became the most frequently used relative pronoun . This move towards simplification was complicated by the introduction of wh- forms （interrogative pronouns which， who， whose， etc.） in a relative function . Consequently， that would be undermined as the uniform relative marker. Immediately， ?at began to be limited to restrictive clauses when wh- pronouns adopted a relative function .
II the rise of wh- pronouns
The transition from interrogative to relative wh- pronoun began after the pronouns started losing their interrogative qualities in indirect questions . Eventually， the generalizing relative pronouns very obviously referred to an antecedent and adopted a permanent relative function. At the end of the Middle English period， that was the most common adnominal relative link， although which was preferred for non-restrictive clauses. The function of the relative pronoun in the clause played an important role in the choice of its form. That is most resistant to replacement by wh-pronouns in subject position . This means that the spread of wh-pronouns was a top-down change from formal and literary circles of language. Yet， text representing oral usage illustrate the robustness of that despite the rise of wh-pronouns in written language .
III animacy of the antecedent
When which developed as a relative pronoun it was used with either human and nonhuman antecedents. The interrogative ‘which’ still uses both today. The most famous example of which being used with a personal antecedent is the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century example of The Lord’s Prayer， which opens with： eg； “Our father， which art in heauen…”.
In Early Modern English， which was freely used with personal antecedents while who was used occasionally with non-personal antecedents. At this time， the possessive whose could refer to inanimate antecedents mainly because neither which nor that had a possessive form. One-third of which usages occurs with a human antecedent in the sixteenth century， but by the seventeenth century， it is down to one-tenth . The growing change is a reflection of the systematization of the use of various grammatical forms in the course of the Early Modern English period and with the polite expression of Tudor and Stuart society， which probably emphasized the observation of the ‘personality’ of the referent .
Increasingly there was a move to PDE usage as which became increasingly confined to non-personal antecedents. Therefore， in the seventeenth century， an animacy parameter is established and very much resembled PDE usage by the eighteenth century. We should note， however， that a reaction against the ‘dehumanizing’ use of that with human antecedent took place after the end of the eighteenth century . The use of that with a personal antecedent would be replaced by the who form to decrease the functional load of that yet again. Also ， which was still being used with a personal referent by the uneducated at the end of the eighteenth century. Even in educated circles， which was used rather than who for personal referents when the relative has a predicative function.
IV written language vs. spoken language
In Early Tudor times， that was more frequent than who and which combined. By the sixteenth century， that becomes less frequent in formal prose. However， it remains the commonest relative pronoun in informal and colloquial styles. This can be seen in Elizabethan and Jacobean plays that try to give the illusion of contemporary speech， and especially those that are remote from courtliness . It seems likely that the growing dominance of which was typical of a formal literary style. In informal style， and probably in speech， that remained the dominant relative pronoun. The trend continues in the seventeenth century； and in the Restoration period， which is entirely almost entirely confined to non-personal antecedents， and that is largely confined to restrictive clauses . From 1700-1900， that was increasingly used less in written data than which —the change occurred rapidly during the eighteenth century and more gradually in the nineteenth century. In the twentieth century， which is used slightly less than before . Today， North American English prefers that to which in restrictive relative clauses even in written contexts .
V Conclusion
Although the proper use of that and which is described in most grammar guides， there continue to be many “authoritative” texts that do not differentiate between them. Tom Mac Arthur states， “That can be used as a relative pronoun in place of who， whom， or which， except as complement of a preposition： the women who/that I rely on， but only the women on whom I rely” . To contrast， some guides make the opposite choice of being too prescriptive. “Harbrace Handbook for Canadians 5th ed.” makes no distinction between restrictive and non-restrictive clauses； rather， it is more concerned with animacy. The intended audience of a usage guide seems to have a direct influence on the specificity of proper usage. It appears that while there is a prescriptive rule for the proper usage of that and which， the dearth of strict application has been increasingly represented in a leniency toward improper use and an acceptance of interchangeability.
【Reference Books】
[1]Millward， C.M. A Biography of the English Language. [M] Fort Worth： Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers， 1994.
[2]Romaine， Suzanne. “Some Historical and Social Dimensions of Syntactic Change in Middle Scots Relative Clauses.” [M]// N.F. Blake and Charles Jones. English historical linguistics： Studies in development. Eds. Sheffield： University of Sheffield， 1984.
[3]Mustanoja， Tauno F. A Middle English Syntax. [M] Helsinki： Société néophilologique 1960.
[4]Dekeyser， Xavier. “Relativizers in Early Modern English.” A dynamic quantitative study.”
Jacek Fisiak. Historical Syntax. Ed. [M] Berlin： Mouton Publishers， 1984.
[5]Barber， Charles. Early Modern English. [M] Edinburgh： Edinburgh University Press 1997.
[6]Ball， C. “A Diachronic Study of Relative Markers in Spoken and Written English.” [M]//Language Variation and Change 1996.
【作者簡介】
王晓惠（1965___）， 女， 辽宁营口人，副教授，研究方向：英语语言学，工作单位：辽宁营口职业技术学院（老商校院内）外语系。