Professional Documents
Culture Documents
to, to
tooth to(o)th(e)
tooth
/to:/
/to:/
/tu:/
Different appearance
collapse of WS standard
development of local traditions (e.g. the Ancrene Riwle
MSS)
influence of French conventions
During ME, very variable:
have a look at the spellings of might in a single texts:
maht mahte mihte mihhte mist mithe mouthe myhte micht
After ME, by the time of the Great Vowel Shift, spelling was
sufficiently well established for it not to reflect sound change
Not all spelling changes reflected sound changes
OE sum -> ME some (a matter of minims!): //
OE a bufan -> ME abuuen, abuue, aboue, above
OE t -> ME out (French convention for spelling /u/)
OE fl -> ME ful, fule, fole, fowl(e), foul(e)
OE n -> ME nu, nv; new, newe; no, noou, noue; noug, nough,
nou , nouwe, nov, nowgh, nuge, nw, nyw, (transmission errors) know, ne,
ynow, ME-15 nou, ME-16 nowe, ME- now,
o o (<Fr<Latin <g->)
n.b. we also see <j> in loanwords like judge,
Jesus, joy (Latin i-, g-)
OE had // <cg>, but non-initially (brycg, ecg)
o o spelled in ME <gg(e), dg(e)>: 1 brycg, bricg, 2-6 brugge,
3-6 brygge, 4-6 bregge, (brige), 4-7 brigge, (5-6, 9 dial. brudge,