Merger of /kw/ and /hw/

An unexpected change in many northern dialects of English involves the fricativisation of Old English /kw/ to /χw/, and its subsequent lenition to /hw/ and /w/ in Modern English dialects. For instance, in dialects of northern England reflexes of Old English cwic ‘quick, active, alive’ or

171

It is usually held that the earlier form suster, soster was later replaced by the Old Norse loanword syster, from which Modern English sister derives (notice that the Old Norse word also evidences loss of /w/). Dialectal forms with long /u:/, e.g. sūmd ‘swum’, do not indicate that loss of /w/ post-dated diphthongisation of /u:/(> /au/) as a result of the Great Vowel Shift in Late Middle English. Such dialect forms stem from Scottish and Northern English dialects, where /u:/ did not diphthongise as result of the Great Vowel Shift (see 10.2.2.4; also Wright 1905: 208, Luick 1914–40: 1060–1, Wełna 2006).

158

Old English cwēme ‘queem, pleasant’ have initial /hw/ or /w/: /(h)wɪk/ and /(h)wi:m/. An example of the distribution of the change in traditional dialects as spoken around the mid- twentieth century based on the word quick (of the nail) is presented in Map 9. Nowadays such pronunciations are rarely heard, either because a particular word has been replaced by a standard English pronunciation or has dropped out of usage altogether. Nonetheless, evidence of the change is retained in the spelling and/or pronunciation of numerous place-names throughout the North, as illustrated in Map 10.

Traditionally, the development of /kw/ to /χw/ has been viewed in connection with the development of /hw/ in Northumbrian Old English. As noted above, /hw/ in words such as what, where and whether became an uvular or velar fricative /χw ~ xw/ in northern and some Midlands English dialects. Some evidence for this /χw/ can be gleaned from the occasional scribal forms

〈chu ~ chw〉 in the Lindisfarne Gospels (ca. 950),172

but the assumption relies more heavily on spellings, such as 〈qu(h) qw(h)〉, in Northern and Midlands Middle English dialects (cf. Kristensson 1967: 211–15 and LALME, I, 270–3). Furthermore, there is also modern dialectal evidence for the initial velar fricative /xw/ in some English dialects of the North West and Scotland (see Ellis 1889: 542, Jones 1991: 141). Indeed, the very fact that preaspirated or voiceless /w/ [hʍ ~ ʍ] has been preserved longest in the North may also point towards an earlier fricativised northern pronunciation.

172

E.g. to chwæm Matthew (preface) 9, 13; to chwæs Mark XII, 23, suachua Matthew V, 41, to chwælc Matthew (preface) 3, 13, suachuelc Matthew XV, 5, sua chuælc Luke IX, 48, suæ chuæt Matthew XVIII, 18 and 19 (see Skeat 1871–87, Blumbach 1974: 81).

159

Map 9. Responses to Survey of English Dialects question VI.7.9: ‘Some boys have the habit of biting their nails down [to the] …’ (Orton et al. 1962–71)

160

161

Research has so far been unable to confirm whether Northumbrian Old English /χw/ simply preserved an earlier Germanic pronunciation or represented a secondary development in especially northern English dialects. However, the majority of scholars consider a secondary development more likely (see Luick 1914–40: 939, Berndt 1960: 173, Blumbach 1974: 85–7, Lutz 1991: 50–4, Dietz 1989: 165). Both Lutz (1988: 50–1, 1991: 50–4) and Dietz (1989: 165, 2006: 284) have suggested that fricativisation of /hw/ may have been due in some way to Scandinavian influence. Immediately striking, for example, is the geographical distribution of 〈qu(h), qw(h)〉 spellings, which, it has been inferred, must reflect either Middle English [xw] or [kw] pronunciations; the presence and absence of such spellings corresponds quite closely to the southern boundary of the Danelaw (though not its northern boundary).173 Furthermore, a similar development of /hw/ to /χw/ occurred in West Scandinavian languages, namely in Norwegian (excepting eastern dialects), Faroese and Icelandic. In fact in all these languages /χw/ ultimately resulted in /kv/.174 Due to chronological disparities and the fact that East Scandinavian varieties – specifically Danish – are thought to have exercised a greater influence on English in the Danelaw than West Scandinavian varieties which show fortition of /hw/ to /kv/, the notion of Scandinavian influence on Old English /hw/ has been rejected by Benskin (1989: 30):

To judge by some recent publications, the mere coincidence of distribution could be taken as sufficient in itself to prove Norse origins. Modern dialects of W. Norse have [kv-] from PGmc *χw, and a similar development could be argued for Middle English. – It should therefore be noted that Scandinavian settlement in England was mostly E. Norse, the development of PGmc *χw- is not to [kw], but to [hw] or [hv] in most of Jutland, and to [v] (from [w]) in the Danish islands, S. Sweden, and E. Norway (Brøndum-Nielsen 1951, Kort 17; 1957 §382.2). The dating, moreover, tells decisively against ME adoption of [kv-] even from W. Norse, for if spelling be any guide, W. Norse [kv-] was not established until the later thirteenth century (Noreen 1970, §243). If OE hw- > [kw-] in ME, then it did so in parallel with W. Norse, and cannot be attributed directly to Norse contact.

Equally aware of the difficulties associated with Norse influence, but at a loss to find any other explanation for the northern dialectal development of /hw/, Dietz has pleaded that the possibility of influence from (West) Scandinavian on the first segment of the Old English cluster /hw/ should not be completely ruled out (1989: 169):

173 _{The northern boundary stopped roughly at the Tees in the North East; 〈qu(h), qw(h)〉 do not} stop at the northern boundary of the Danelaw but continue into Scotland.

174

The only exception being conservative southern Icelandic dialects (not including Reykjavik), which retain [xw].

162

Diese Daten und sprachgeographischen Fakten sprechen nicht eben für die Annahme, die schon Mitte des 10. Jahrhunderts in der nordhumbrischen Interlinearglossierung des Lindisfarne-Evangeliars greifbare Entwicklung hw > χw sei exogenen Ursprungs, schließen sich andererseits aber auch nicht völlig aus. Da sich Norweger hauptsächtlich im Nordwesten Englands niederließen, wäre /xw/ am ehesten dort zu erwarten. Es tritt jedoch gleichermaßen im dänisch besiedelten Norden und Osten auf. Sprachliche Kontaktwirkungen können hier erst zu Beginn des 10. Jahrhunderts eingetreten sein. Gleichwohl darf zumindest die Möglichkeit fördernden skandinavischen Einflusses nicht rundweg ausgeklammert werden. 175

In a more recent publication, Dietz (2006: 246, 263–4, 284) has stated once again that there may have been large scale phonological influence on the phonology of Northern and Midlands dialects but in what seems to me a slightly more assertive manner (or possibly this impression is gained from the fact that he no longer draws attention to the chronological and dialectal difficulties as in his earlier publication). Crucially, however, Dietz is unable to muster any additional evidence to strengthen his notion of Scandinavian phonological support; so again he has to rely on geographical inference, namely the assumed correspondence with the southern boundary of the Danelaw alluded to above.

175

‘These data and the language-geographic facts do not exactly support the assumption that the development hw > χw – posited on account of the Northumbrian interlinear gloss to the Lindisfarne Gospels dating from the mid tenth century – is due to foreign influence, yet it cannot be ruled out entirely. Because Norwegians settled predominantly in the north-west of England, we would most likely expect to find /xw/ there. But it is found to an equal degree in the Danish settled North and East. In these areas language contact influence cannot have taken effect before the tenth century. Nevertheless, the possibility of supporting Scandinavian influence cannot be wholly dismissed’.

163

Map 11. Locations of the authorial dialects of five compositions evidencing alliterations of etymological /kw/ with /hw/

164

One advantage of the Scandinavian contact hypothesis has been the recognition that frication of /hw/ to /χw/ and ultimately its merger with /kw/ could explain why only in Northern and North Midlands alliterative compositions etymological /hw/ (< OE /hw/) alliterates with /kw/ (< /kw/ OE/ON/OF) (see Kluge 1901: 991, Lutz 1991: 54).176 Five compositions evidence such alliterations – Awntyrs off Arthure, Siege of Jerusalem, Wars of Alexander and Parlement of the Thre Ages and The Destruction of Troy – the authorial dialects of which are plotted on Map 11.177 The following alliterative lines, from The Destruction of Troy (Glasgow, UL, Hunterian v.2.8, dated ca. 1400) are representative; they also demonstrate that the scribe of the manuscript spelt words such as white (< OE hwīt) and queam ‘pleasant’ (< OE cwēme) with interchangeable 〈qw- ~ qwh- ~ wh-〉, which also suggests that no phonological distinction existed between the previously distinct clusters /hw/ and /kw/ (lines cited below are from Matsumoto’s edition, 2002):

Wherfore I beqwethe me to your qweme spouse (633) Þat qwaint was & qwem all of white syluer (776)

Qwherfore to qweme qwyt of all other (108)

Qwerfore vs qwemes noght now his qwaint speche (1927)

Wherfore wheme kyng for what þat may come (2648)

Qwitter to qweme þen þe white snaw (3027) Alse qwyte & qwem as any qwalle bon (3054)

Who is now so qweme or qwaint of his wit (4202) With qwistlis & qwes & other qwaint gere (6051) And the whelis full whem all of white aumbur (6203)

Wherfore to qwheme & to white vs of skathe (11510) To whyte vs of whete qwarters þai aske (11727)

176

In this way, the merger of /hw/ at /kw/ in northern English could be seen as almost identical to the merger of Old Norse /hw/ at /kv/ in Norwegian, Faroese and Icelandic dialects.

177

For further details on how the locations of the authorial dialects have been deduced, see Turville-Petre (1988: 264–9), Gates (1969: 30), Hanna (1974: 50), Ginsberg (1992: 1–2), Hanna & Lawton (2003: xxvii–xxxv), Duggan & Turville-Petre (1989, xlii). Sir Gawain and the Green Knight (London, British Library, Cotton Nero A.x) is noted for the spellings whene ‘queen’ (at lines 74 and 2492) and whyssynes ‘cushions’ (line 877) (see Tolkien & Gordon 1967). However, in the poem /kw/ is always found to alliterate with itself or with /k/, but never with /hw/. Furthermore, the poet alliterates /hw/ with itself and with /w/. In fact, even when etymological /hw/ is rendered in the manuscript as 〈qu〉 it can alliterate with /w/ (255, 257, 1186, 1227). These facts indicate that in the scribe‘s dialect /kw/ and /hw/ had probably merged, but not in the Gawain-poet’s dialect (Oakden 1930: 79). Indeed, it so happens that for Gawain there is enough circumstantial linguistic evidence which does point towards a scribal transmission more northerly than that of the poet (see Duggan 1997: 241–2). In short, scribal dialects must be distinguished from authorial dialects (see Laing 2004 for further discussion).

165

Of qwhete & of qwhite syluer qwemly to gedur (11784) Vnqwemys his qwate & þe qwele turnys (11682)

As appealing as the above West Scandinavian interpretation is (i.e. putative alliteration on /kw/), it is remarkable to note the dearth of words which exhibit /kw/ (or /kv/) as a reflex of older /hw/ in English dialects of the Early Modern English and Modern English periods. In fact, only three words from Wright’s dialect grammar (1905: 209) apparently serve as evidence: whiff ‘a slight puff or gust’ (Yorkshire, Lancashire), whig ‘a yokel’ (Northumberland) and whims (plural of whim) ‘fanciful configurations’ (North Riding of Yorkshire). More alarming is the fact that none of these words has the hint of a reliable etymology: whiff (first recorded 16th century) is considered to be onomatopoetic, while whig (recorded 17th century) and whim(s) (recorded 16th century) have no historical cognates whatever. Because these words have no secure Germanic or even Medieval English pedigree,178 the genuineness of these words as evidence for the change /hw/ > /kw/ is cast in serious doubt. If the development of /hw/ > /kw/ did take place, it is necessary to assume that all words (excluding whiff, whig and whims) underwent subsequent frication to /χw/ and finally further lenition to /hw/ or /w/. I have attempted to provide an illustration of this suggested series of changes in Fig. 4:

PGmc Pre-OE OE (Northern) ME (dialects) E (dialects)

/kw/ /kw/ /kw/ /kw/ /kw/

/χw/ /hw/ /χw/ /ʍ/, /w/

Figure 4. Phonological developments assumed by the Scandinavian contact theory

The above battery of changes can account for the merging of the two distinct Old English clusters /kw/ and /hw/, as confirmed by the dialectal alliterative verse, but fails to provide any explanation for why /kw/ was subsequently fricativised to /χw/ and finally /hw/ and /w/ in English dialects as in Maps 9–10. Furthermore, Scandinavian influence fails to explain instances of the change /kw/ > /w/ in southerly dialects, in which Norse influence could hardly have been

178

It can be inferred that whim did exist in Medieval English if the University of Wales Dictionary (GPC s.v.) is correct in assuming that the Middle Welsh chwim, chwimp (attested in the fourteenth century) is an English loanword, even though this word first surfaces in sixteenth century English as whim-wham and in the seventeenth century as whim (see OED s.vv. whim- wham, whim). The putative North Riding of Yorkshire form quiams ‘whims’ is mentioned once in a later edition of Robinson’s A glossary of words used in the neighbourhood of Whitby (1876) and has simply cited as a North Riding pronunciation by others ever since. No other experts on the North Riding dialect from the period mention the form. Alfred Edward Pease (1928: s.v.), born 1857 and a native of the Riding, acknowledges that the form is in Robinson’s glossary, but indicates that he has never heard the pronunciation in his life.

166

an influential factor, such as in Devonshire, Northamptonshire, Flintshire, Denbighshire, Warwickshire, Shropshire (see Table 18). In addition, we may note sporadic attestations of initial /w/ in quick in traditional dialects of Cornwall, Hertfordshire, Oxfordshire and Somerset (Orton et al. 1962–71: VI.7.9). To summarise the above points: Scandinavian influence, besides being already dubious on account of chronological and dialect-specific aberrations, is unable to provide an explanation for the subsequent frication of /kw/, nor the distribution of this change.

As I have set out in Laker (2002), a more straightforward explanation for the dialectal change can be found if one compares the Pre-Old English phonotactic system with that of Late British. Whereas (Pre-)Old English had the two clusters /kw/ and /hw/, varieties of Late British had neither of these. Instead, a similar but by no means identical uvular fricative cluster /χw/ was found, as today in Modern Welsh and Modern Breton. Due to its obvious similarity to the unfamiliar Pre-Old English clusters, a process of sound substitution would seem very likely, especially as there is evidence to suggest that the acquisition of similar sounds is often harder than acquisition of obviously different sounds (see 3.2). Furthermore, the difficulty would have been compounded by the fact that speakers of Late British would have been faced with the difficulty of acquiring not one but two new phonotactic combinations, which were in many respects phonetically similar to a native cluster /χw/. The likelihood of substitution finds confirmation in the fact that the phonological form of Old English and Middle English loanwords containing /kw/ and /hw/ that were taken into Welsh underwent substitution to /χw/, spelt 〈chw〉 (see Parry-Williams 1923: 221–2, 228–9). The examples presented below are all considered English loanwords by the University of Wales Dictionary (see GPC 838–63; note that dates of first recorded use are given in parentheses). As long as the same type of sound substitution took place when early Britons acquired English (and there is no reason to suppose this was not the case), this interpretation presents no complications and makes comprehensible the previously inexplicable merger of /kw/ and /hw/ in English dialects.

English Welsh

quail chwail (1780)

quarrel chwarel (1445–75)

quarrelle chwarel (14th century)

quart chwart (1545)

quarter chwarter (1445–75)

(to) quarter chwarteraf (15th century)

quintain chwintan, chwintyn (1547)

quit chwit (1547)

quittance chwitans (1547)

(to) quit chwitiaf, chwitio (16th century)

whale chwâl, whâl (16th century)

167 (to) whey chweaf, chweu (1632)

whelp chwelp, chwelff (1823)

wharve chwefan, chwarfan (14–15th century)

whew chwiw (1776)

wherry chweri (1732–6)

whither chwidr (16th century)

whiff chwiff (1592)

whig chwig (1592)

whig chwig (1752)

whim chwim, chwimp (14th century)

whimsy chwimsi (1757)

whip chwip (16th century)

whirligig chwirligwgan (15–16th century)

whit chwît, chwîd (13th century)

whittle chwitl (1794)

whitling chwitlyn (1741)

whin chwyn (1455–85)

(to) whirl chwyrliaf (1592)

Thus, the (Pre-)Old English clusters /kw/ and /hw/ would have been replaced by /χw/. The uvular fricative /χw/ (or a similar variant thereof, such as a velar fricative /xw/), then survived into the Middle English period. By this analysis, etymological /kw/ (< OE/ON/OF /kw/) and /hw/ (< OE /hw/) in the Northern and North Midland compositions mentioned above alliterated with a fricative variant /χw ~ xw/, not /kw/. Middle English spelling variants for etymological /kw/, namely 〈wh, quh, qwh〉, may also indicate the change and can help us to assess its geographical distribution; however, these variants are not considered in LALME, despite being quite frequently found in Northern and North Midlands texts and sporadically in East Midlands and West Midlands texts.179 Over the course of time, Middle English dialectal

179 _{Under these circumstances, the best way of getting some inkling of the distribution of these} orthographic forms in Middle English is to search through the detailed entries of the Middle English Dictionary (MED) and the Dictionary of the Older Scottish Tongue (DOST), which aim to register all known spelling variants of words (though these dictionaries do not attempt to register every known spelling variant in every manuscript investigated). In particular, MED (s.v. qu- cons[onant] clust[ter]) provides a useful survey of manuscripts which contain 〈wh〉 variants for etymological /kw/ (see Laker 2009b). Dietz (2006: 284) has claimed that 〈wh〉 spellings for etymological /kw/ show the same Northern and East Midland distributions as the 〈quh, qwh〉 spellings for etymological /hw/. This ignores the fact that 〈wh〉 spellings for /kw/ are attested with some frequency in several central West Midlands texts, as can be seen when one goes through the MED entries one by one.

168

/χw/ (< /kw/, /hw/) weakened to become /hw/, and this ultimately merged in most northern dialects with the inherited labial-velar approximant /w/. Most of the place-names identified in Map 10 signal the earlier pronunciation of an initial preaspirated or voiceless /w/, i.e. /hw/ or /ʍ/, with the spelling 〈wh〉. Furthermore, early dialect writers also use 〈wh〉 spellings, e.g. why ‘quey’, whickens ‘quicks, roots of weeds’, wheean cat ‘tabby-cat’ (Meriton 1697: 122–3). Ellis (1889: 621, 631) documented initial /hw ~ ʍ/ pronunciations for the word quean ‘female’ in Muker, Dent and Howgill in the north-west of rural Yorkshire in the late nineteenth century. However, by the time of the Survey of English Dialects, the isogloss for initial preaspirated /hw ~ ʍ/ had moved further north and included Northumberland, East Cumberland and north-west Country Durham, i.e. in the same area where words such as where, wheel and white also preserve initial preaspiration. For the rest of the North only initial /w/ was found (see Map 9).

As a result of both Scandinavian settlements from the ninth century and the Norman Conquest of 1066, further words with initial /kw/ were in due course borrowed into English. Although Brittonic was no longer spoken even in the North and Midlands by this time, the phonotactic system of the English spoken in these areas still did not possess /kw/. For this reason, /kw/ from Norse and French borrowings also underwent substitution to /χw/, as Middle English spellings and alliterations and traditional Modern English dialects demonstrate. It is noteworthy that the hypothesis of Late British influence also explains a number of other problems associated