Preface. The present study was originally meant to embrace a short survey of the various categories of elliptical words in Modern English and an examination of the elliptical phenomenon as revealed in them. But the vastness of the subject and the necessity of collecting and presenting a sufficient material made it an imperative necessity to narrow down the scope of my study so as to embrace only one particular category of elliptical words. Still, the original plan has been adhered to, in as far as I have begun with an enquiry into the delimitation of ellipsis in general, and have made elliptical personal names, as illustrating phonological ellipsis, the subject of my study. This has been done in the vague hope of possibly finding an opportunity at some future date of dealing also with the remaining categories of elliptical words. I have even been forced to omit the latter part of my examination of elliptical personal names, though it is ready in MS. Throughout the book I have used the term Modern English (MnE.) in the same sense as it is used by Dr. Sweet, i. e. to signify the period of English from the beginning of the 16th century down to the present time. It is with great pleasure that I take advantage of this opportunity to express my sincere obligations to my teacher in Teutonic Philology, Professor Dr. Axel Erdmann, whose kindness and encouragement have been generously extended to me during the course of my studies at this University. For assistance in reading the proof-sheets of this book from the point of view of the wording of it, I wish to thank the University Lector, Mr. G. E. Fuhrken. K. S. Upsala, May 21, 1904. 388157 CALIFORNIA CHAPTER I. The delimitation of ellipsis. To decide when in a morphem1 ellipsis is to be assumed and when not, is a veritable 'crux grammaticorum'. Such differences of opinion and such inconsistency are displayed by grammarians, that it is obvious that no definite point of view has been determined in fixing this grammatical notion. Consequently ellipsis belongs to those grammatical terms the meaning of which is vague and confusing. Intending here, however, to make elliptical words, as far as MnE. is concerned, the subject of our study, we find ourselves forced to investigate, if only briefly, the current conception of the term ellipsis. We shall indicate the point of view on which we intend to base our delimitation of ellipsis, and subsequently endeavour to determine the characteristics involved in contradistinction to those of similar phenomena. theory of ellipsis and its origin. The grammatical term ellipsis was first used by the Grecian 1. The current rhetoricians and grammarians. By this denomination they meant a shortness in linguistic expression, especially in the structure of sentences, which shortness, as compared with the normal or logically correct expression, appeared as an incompleteness or abbre 1 Phonology, Semology, and Morphology are the three principal divisions in which, in our opinion, the study of grammar ought to be treated. (Cf. my essay: Quelques Remarques sur la Délimitation de la syntaxe in Uppsatser i Romansk Filologi, tillägnade Professor P. A. Geijer. Uppsala, 1901) Phonology is concerned with the study of the physical element of language, i. e. the speech sounds and the phonems, which latter may be made up of one sound or of a series of sounds forming a connected whole. Semology, an expression coined by Professor NOREEN on the analogy of morphology and phonology, deals with the study of the psychical element of language, i. e. the meanings of morphems. Lastly, Morphology is the study of the forms and structure of language, i. e. the morphems (comprising affixes, words, syntactical combinations (including simple and compound sentences). These grammatical terms will be used in the present study. a. Ellipsis in sentences. = viation. (Gr. elleipsis omission). They did not hereby pay any attention to the point whether or not from an historical point of view an abbreviation existed. They made the observation that these short expressions often had another emotional effect (»Gefühlswert») than those morphems which were the normal expression of the same thought. In other words, they noticed that ellipsis might be used as a linguistic means of effect, and from this point of view they instituted a distinction between rhetorical and grammatical ellipsis. The latter was probably meant to designate such elliptical morphems where the emotional value did not deviate from that of normal prose, or which at least did not serve a rhetorical purpose. But a clear distinction between these two notions is not met with in antiquity any more than in modern times, where the same division has often been adopted 1. If this interpretation of their meaning of the terms is right, it will be admitted that the division is at least semologically justified. But terminologically considered it is not justified, inasmuch as all ellipsis must be recognized as grammatical. The grammarians of antiquity introduced also the term brachylogy. It was meant to indicate what Cicero calls 'concisa brevitas', i. e. a short, pregnant manner of expression which did not appear as an abbreviation. But no definite distinction between ellipsis and brachylogy was established, nor has it been in our days when the same terms are employed. Thus GERBER2 assigns to brachylogy apokoinou-constructions such as G. Ich finde Trost wo du Schmerzen (sc. findest), whereas by the current grammars they are usually classed as elliptical. Ever since the days of antiquity the determining of the occurrence of ellipsis in sentences has been closely connected with the conception of the idea expressed by the word sentence. Whether we maintain with the Alexandrine grammarian DIONYSIOS THRAX that sentence is a combination of words expressing a complete thought, or with the German grammarian K. F. BECKER, in modern times, that sentence is a thought expressed in words, the definition of the conception sentence is essentially dependent on the meaning of thought. But this word now generally designates a judgment, and if, in old times, it also comprised 'Vorstellungen und Empfindungen' so as to correspond to what the German philosophy calls 'Bewusstseinsinhalt', it nevertheless generally de1 Cf. G. GERBER, Die Sprache als Kunst, Bromberg 1871, i. 489 sqq. 2 Cf. G. GERBER, op. cit., i. 491. signated a judgment, when used to define a sentence1. Now, declarative sentences are the only kinds of sentence that contain a judgment, and consequently the only ones that are taken into consideration by logic. Thus it has come about that the definition of sentence has been determined exclusively by the nature of the sentences of statement. The principal constituents of a judgment have ever from the time of the Aristotelian system of logic been considered to be subject and predicate. »Indem nun», WUNDT says, »jedes Urtheil ein Aussagesatz ist, ebenso aber jeder eigentliche Aussagesatz logisch als ein Urtheil betrachtet werden kann, lassen sich die Begriffe Subject und Prädicat zweifellos auch auf den Aussagesatz übertragen». It is the same argument that already in antiquity led to the logical distinction of subject and predicate being converted into a grammatical distinction. Be it remembered, however, that WUNDT considers subject and predicate to be necessary constituents of any complete declarative sentence and no doubt unjustly maintains that in such, logical subject and predicate always coincide with grammatical subject and predicate, whereas grammar since antiquity requires that any sentence must contain subject and predicate to be considered complete. Now, the subject is generally expressed by a noun, and the predicate by a verb in finite form. The assumption that a complete sentence must contain subject and predicate, became therefore at the same time an assumption that it must contain noun and verb. This view of matters has led to important consequences as regards the conception of the occurrence of ellipsis in sentences. As subject and predicate or noun and verb were looked upon as indispensable ingredients in complete sentences, all sentences lacking in these requirements were considered anomalous. This anomaly was explained as due to ellipsis. One assumed an omission, now of the subject, now of the predicate, now of the copula that formerly often was looked upon as a constituent part of a judgment and consequently also of a sentence3. In this way it is that ellipsis has become an important factor in interpreting the structure of sentences. But before giving examples of various kinds of sentences, generally designated as elliptical, we will first indicate our con 1 Cf. Wundt, Völkerpsychologie i, Die Sprache, ii. 222 sqq. 2 Cf. Ibid., p. 258. 3 Cf. Ibid., p. 223. |