Добавил:
Upload Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Пособие Тихонова послед вариант.tmp.doc
Скачиваний:
53
Добавлен:
24.09.2019
Размер:
1.2 Mб
Скачать

4.5.5.5. Changes in Preterite-Present Verbs

(1) The verb wot < ME wǬt (know) was still found in Shakespeare, e.g. I wot well where he is. Later the verb disappeared from literary speech. Its use was limited to dialects and poetry.

(2) The verb owe (< OE āʒ, ME ouh) is found in Shakespeare with the meaning «possess» and in its modern meaning, e.g. I am not worthy of the health I owe (possess); who now the price of his dear blood doth owe.

In the XVII c. the verb owe is ousted by the new verb own derived from the adjective.

Ought (a past tense form) has acquired its modern meaning in Shakespeare and thus, has been separated from the past both phonetically and semantically, e.g. the watch ought to offend no man. In Shakespeare there is only one example of ought with the meaning «owed», e.g. and said this other day you ought him a thousand pound. Usually the weak regular past tense form owed is used, e.g. the noblest grace she owed (possessed).

In the development of this verb the shifting of the meaning from past to present took place twice. The OE form āʒ, originally a strong past, acquired the meaning of present in OE. The form āhte (derived according to the weak conjugation) in its turn acquired the meaning of present in NE.

(3) The ME verb deh, dowen < OE deaʒ, duʒon disappeared.

(4) The ME verb an, unnen < OE ann, unnon disappeared.

(5) The verb can remained intact.The absence of the ending in the 3-rd person singular in the present tense (he can) testifies to its belonging to the preterite-present type.

The form could is used to mean either the past indicative or the present subjunctive.

(6) The ME verb tharf, thurven < OE þearf, þurfon (need) disappeared.

(7) The verb dar, durren < OE dear, durron has survived in the forms dare and durst (past, now archaiс). Alongside of durst this verb had a past tense form, dared, derived on the analogy of regular weak verbs. The preterite-present origin of the verb is still felt in the 3-rd person singular present form without -s, as in he dare come alongside of he dares to come.

(8) The verb shall was retained in NE mainly as an auxiliary of the future tense. The form «should» has preserved its meaning of the past tense only in the «future in the past», otherwise it has acquired a modal meaning close to that of «ought». Thus, in most cases «should» is no longer a past tense form of the verb «shall», but a separate verb.

(9) The ME verb man (remember) has disappeared.

(10) The verb «may» has been retained in NE. However, its form «might» hardly ever refers to the past tense (except indirect speech); due to its modal meaning it has acquired the meaning of present unreal conditional. Thus, in this verb the change of the past meaning into present has taken place for the 2-nd time. The absence of an -s inflexion in the 3-rd person singular present indicative is a sure sign of its preterite-present origin.

(11) The ME verb mōt, mōste has survived.The form mote is still found in Early NE as an archaism, e.g.

as fair as fair mote be (E.Spenser).

The past form moste (could) had sometimes been used in a present meaning in ME already. This use and the concomitant change of the meaning «can» into «must» began with the use of the conditional form. ME «þou mōste» (you might) came to mean «you must». In NE «must» refers to the present tense. It has the meaning of the past only in indirect speech. Thus, the verb mōt, mōste underwent the change of meaning from past to present twice during its history.