2.1.3 Other vowel changes.

Diphthongization. Stipulated by force stress in some Germanic languages, e.g. Old High German, when vowel ē was diphthongized to ea, ia, ie, long vowel ō was diphthongized to oa, ua, uo. English and Dutch vowels were affected by the process of diphthongization as well.

Monophthongization. Force stress stimulated the opposite process with diphthongs ei, ai, au which changed into monophthongs ī, ā/ē, ō/ā.

Historical Morphology

1.1. The Word-Class Noun

1.1.1. Structure of a Noun in Germanic

Originally, PG noun was characterized by a three-morpheme structure, including the root, stem-forming suffix and grammatical ending. The stem-suffix was used as a means of word derivation, and the ending marked the grammatical form.

A 3-morpheme structure is well preserved in the runic inscriptions of the IV-V centuries. It illustrates the complex morphological structure inherited by PG from PIE.

Late PG was marked by simplifying tendencies which led to the substitution of a three-morpheme structure for a two-morpheme one. The morphological structure was simplified due to the reduction or merging of stem-forming suffix with an ending.

The primary stimulus for simplifying changes was the adoption by Germanic languages of a fixed initial stress, which caused the weakening of unstressed syllable in final positions and changes in overall structure of a noun.

Stem-forming suffix was the basis for the division of PG nouns into classes. According to stem-forming suffixes PG nouns fell into –a- stems (=IE -o- stems), -o- stems (=IE -a- stems), -i-, -u-, -n-, -nd (=IE -nt- stem) and root- stems.

This grouping accounts for the formation of different declensions in nouns. Each group of nouns acquired a different set of endings.

The declensions, which were preserved in the early periods of language history, even after the simplification of stem-forming suffixes, are classified into:

1) vocalic, or strong declension: nouns, whose stems originally ended in a vowel (–a- stem , -o-stem, -u- stem, –i- stem);

2) weak declension: -n-stem nouns;

3) minor declensions: –r- stem, –nd- stem, root–stem, –s- stem.

1.1.2. Grammatical categories of a Noun in Germanic

Declensions did not belong to the complex of grtammatical categories of a noun. The word-class noun in all old Germanic languages had 3 grammatical categories:

1. the category of number;

2. the category of case;

3. the category of gender.

All old Germanic dialects expressed the categories of number, case and gender synthetically, by means of the same grammatical marker.

There indices of number differed in Germanic languages, where they also depended on the type of declension, case, etc. Later the leveling of endings in plural took place.

There were 3 types of number distinction differentiated in Germanic languages:

1) a heterogeneous type is marked by a number of allomorphs which express plural number (German, Norwegian, Swedish, Danish), e.g. in German and Norwegian there are 5 markers of the category of number. For example, number indices in German include productive plural endings –e (with or without umlaut), –er(e) for all neuter nouns (with or without umlaut); –en, productive in Fem., fragmentary in the neuter, rather productive in the masculine, the least productive being zero-ending.

2) a homogeneous type has a unified model of plural number (English);

3) intermediate (Dutch). Intermediate number distinction in Dutch is marked by two plural endings: -en and –s. Here gender distinctions are of minor importance. Umlaut is not productive.

The category of case in old Germanic languages was introduced by a four-case system which included:

1) Nominative Case (the case of the subject);

2) Genitive Case (of nouns serving as attributes to other nouns);

3. Dative Case (used with prepositions);

4. Accusative Case (indicated a relationship to a verb, time and distance).

In the course of language evolution the development of the category of case resulted in:

1. Preservation of a 4-case system (German, Icelandic).

2. Loss of a 4-case system and a transition to a 2-case system (English, Frisian, Dutch, Danish, Swedish, Norwegian). Afrikaans having no cases at all belongs to this group as well.

According to the first tendency in the languages with a 4-case system the changes took place as well (e.g. the change of the Genitive case usage in German).

The second tendency marked by more obvious changes resulted from the neutralization of case oppositions and the development of case endings homonymy. It was rather a slow process which did not influence the whole paradigm at once.

The turning point in the development of a case paradigm dates back to the period of 12th – 14^th centuries. In Swedish the process lasted to the 16^th century. The number of cases was reduced to two (Common and Genitive). The Common case combined the meaning of the Nominative, Dative and Accusative and, partially, the Genitive. The tendency towards the neutralization of cases is believed to be caused by phonetic processes stimulated by weakening of unstressed vowels in a final position and the development of analytical means expressing case relations.

As for the markers of cases, thhe most stable in the Germanic languages was the Genitive ending –s. Being strongly marked in West Germanic languages, it forced out other endings of the Genitive. In Scandinavian languages –s became universal in Danish by the 14^th century, in Swedish and Norwegian by the 16^th century. Though having the marker –s Icelandic and Faroese tend to substitute it by a prepositional phrase.

In Old English the leveling of the Genitive sg. inflection in favour of –es reached an advanced stage in the 10^th century.

Nouns in old Germanic languages were also differentiated for the grammatical category of gender. They fell into masculine, feminine and neuter. Such division is still preserved in modern German, Icelandic, Faroese and New Norwegian.

Gender distinctive properties can be divided into strongly marked, marked and initially unmarked by specific markers of gender.

Strongly marked were represented by Germanic feminine o-stems, –ōn and –in-stems, where gender properties were expressed in most cases.

Marked were represented by –a-stems (Masc., Neuter), Goth. –u-stems (Masc., Neuter), -n-stems (Masc., Neuter). Their gender properties are expressed in a limited number of cases, mainly Nom. and Acc., both sg.

Initially unmarked which were represented by Goth. root-stems and –i-stems.

In all Germanic languages strongly marked and marked stems prevailed. Unmarked stems were levelled according to the strongly marked and marked stems.

The category of gender also underwent transformations in the course of time which resulted in:

1) preservation of a 3-gender system (in Icelandic, Faroese, New Norwegian, German, Yiddish);

2) shift to a 2-gender system (in Danish, Swedish, Dutch, Frisian, Dano-Norwegian), where common (formed by merging of masculine and feminine) and neuter genders are found;

3) extinction of the category of gender (in English, Afrikaans).

All in all, the grammatical categories of a noun and their markers were inherited by Germanic languages from PIE. The preservation of full paradigms of oppositions illustrates the maintenance of archaic features while the simplification or elimination of certain forms are the evidences of the development of new typological features.