Editor for this issue: T. Daniel Seely <dseely
emunix.emich.edu>
In reference to Christopher Upward's posting of 25 September 1995. The story about silent reading as a great surprise does indeed involve St Augustine, but it was not Augustine who did it. It was in fact his teacher St Ambrose, whom he observed when he came to Rome to study, sitting in his study and reading silently. Augustine makes some remarks about how (as I recall) it might have been the case that he did it to avoid damaging his voice. The story appears in the book of the Confessiones that details his meeting with Ambrose. On Old English writing: there are some very interesting things that haven't been studied enough, about WHAT precisely is delimited. The Beowulf MS for instance typically (both scribes) writes the elements of compounds separately, as well as separating affixes with fairly heavy structure from their stems, e.g. suffixes like -lice 'adverbial'. It is also common for prepositions to be written as proclitic to their objects, or even for a whole string of light elements to be handled this way: e.g. (substituting <th> for 'thorn'): thacomofmore = tha com of mor-e 'then (he) came from the moor' The guiding principle appears to be largely prosodic, in that clitic groups are written as orthographically clitic as well. There are also funnies in word-division due to other things, like line-division, e.g. the name 'Grendel' written (impossibly) Gre ndel when space ran out at the right margin, and a couple of funny divisions of geminates within the word, like frem man = fremm-an 'to perform' I always find it a salutary exercise to get my Old English students to read some stuff in MS facsimile after they've been used to editions with punctuation and modern word-division. This also makes them realize that in texts that don't punctuate, or punctuate only metrically, like much Old Germanic verse, syntactic decisions are not clear-cut, and notions like 'subordinate clause', even 'sentence' are matters for the reader to work out. This makes them suspicious of both editions and work on Old English syntax that assumes 'modern' definitions of parataxis, hypotaxis, etc., which is all to the good. Roger Lass Roger Lass Department of Linguistics University of Cape Town Rondebosch 7700/South Africa Tel +(021) 650 3138 Fax +(021) 650 3726Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue