GIEFAN vs. SELLAN: the rivalry between the main OE ditransitives - Anastasia Eseleva's presentation at the Helsinki Corpus Festival

1. The Helsinki Corpus Festival
30 September, 2011
GIEFAN vs. SELLAN:
the rivalry between the main OE ditransitives
Anastasia Eseleva
Institute for Linguistic Studies
of the Russian Academy of Sciences
St. Petersburg

2. Introduction
The present study deals with two (almost) synonymous ditransitive verbs
which shared the meaning of ‘voluntary giving’ [BT] in Old English, namely:
giefan and sellan.
The competition between these verbs, however, has led to subsequent
changes in meaning for both. In the course of time the meaning of giefan
has broadened, while sellan has undergone semantic narrowing and only
retained the meaning which it had once shared with OE verb bebycgean.
Syntactic changes did not fail to follow those of the semantic field.

3. Introduction
In OE both giefan and sellan generally occurred in ditransitive pattern with
Nominative Subject, Dative Object and Accusative Object
[Visser vol. I, 1984: 621], for instance:
(1) & þa salde se here him foregislas & micle aþas, þæt hie of his rice uuoldon
(ChronA (878.13))
- ‘And then the enemy gave him preliminary hostages and great oaths that they would leave his
kingdom’
(2) he geaf heom his bletsunge (LS 29 (Nicholas) 0118 (328))
- ‘he gave them his blessing’

4. Introduction
It has been claimed that prepositional complementation is uncommon
either for the verb giefan or its close synonyms [Žigadlo, 1961: 101;
Denison,1993: 103], such as sellan.
In PDE, however, the verb to give may occur in several grammatical
patterns, of which ditransitive complementation (Double Object
construction, e.g. John gave Mary a book) remains the leading one.
On the contrary, to sell seems to be almost driven out of this, once
common, pattern (i.e. the type John sold Mary a book is extremely rare
in PDE).

5. Introduction
To compare, here are some Present-Day English parallels taken from
J.Mukherjee’s study of ditransitives in PDE. According to Mukherjee, the ability of
a verb to form Double Object construction should be treated as the main criterion
of ditransitivity. The figures for to give and to sell in a Double Object construction
in PDE (from: [Mukherjee 2005]) differ significantly:
Double Object construction Occurrences in ICE-GB
to give (‘John gave Mary a book’) 562
to sell (‘John sold Mary a book’) 1
→ In Present-Day English to sell generally requires a preposition and, therefore,
forms a Prepositional Object construction, e.g. ‘John sold a book to Mary’.
→To give is considered to be the main ditransitive verb of Present-Day English.

6. Aims and plan of the study
The comparison of the verbs giefan and sellan with their present-day counterparts
proves that great changes have affected their distribution since Old English times.
Both verbs were (1) commonly used in the same construction type, (2) were
synonyms, and (3) of the two the meaning of sellan was broader. We observe a
vice-versa situation in Present-Day English.
Therefore, the study is to answer the questions: how, when, and why did it happen?
The study consists of two parts. First, several significant examples from individual
texts are discussed. It is shown that the frequencies have changed dramatically,
and there were cases of the substitution of one verb with another in different
versions of one and the same text.
In the second part, the results of a study based on the Helsinki Corpus of the
English Texts (Old English part) are discussed which illustrate the corresponding
changes in frequencies for both verbs in their simplex and prefixed forms, and
provide some possible answers to the questions above.

7. Giefan vs. sellan in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
To check whether there was any competition between the verbs in question in OE
times, let us turn to the most well-known document preserved in several versions -
the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. While the earlier manuscript (Parker MS, 9th century)
obviously favours sellan, in the later one (Peterborough MS, 12th century) giefan is
more frequent.
sellan ↓ giefan ↑
Fq/10,000 wds Fq/10,000 wds
Parker MS 13.7 3.4
Peterborough MS 7.6 16.7

8. Giefan vs. sellan in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
Most of the passages containing giefan in Peterborough Chronicle (MS E) are so
called ‘Peterborough interpolations’, i.e. fragments included into the common text of
the Chronicle by the scribes of this very MS by c. 1121. Such passages, as Susan
Irvine writes, “can be identified (…) by the distinctively late characteristics of their
language” [Irvine 2004: xc], for instance:
(3) Ic Wulfere gife to dæi Sancte Petre & þone abbode Saxulf & þa munecas of þe
mynstre þas landes & þas wateres & meres & fennes & weres & ealle þa landes þa
þærabuton liggeð (ChronE 656.31)
– ‘I, Wulfhere, give to-day to St. Peter, and the abbot Saxulf, and the monks of the monastery,
these lands, and these waters, and meres, and fens, and seas, and all the lands that lie therabout’.
Here we might note þone instead of þam, i.e. the Accusative case marking the
Recipient. These are signals of confusion and fluctuations in OE ditransitive pattern,
which are found in constructions formed with the verb giefan.

9. Giefan vs. sellan in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
While giefan is on the offensive in Peterborough interpolations (which are additional
parts of the Chronicle E), sellan surrenders its position in the common text as well.
For some unknown reason it is substituted by the scribe, cf.:
(4) & Scottas him aþas sealdan, þæt hie woldan eal þæt he wolde (Chron A 946.3)
- ‘and the Scots gave oaths to him that they would agree to all that he wanted’.
(5) & Scottas him aðas sworon þet hi eall wolden þet he wolde (Chron E 948.1)
- ‘and the Scots swore oaths to him that they would agree to all that he wanted’.

10. Giefan vs. sellan in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle
As MS E dates back to the 12th century it could be argued that the change in the
spread of giefan is one of the numerous changes of Middle English period, that the
replacement should have taken place mainly during the ME period – just as when
most of other changes happened.
However, as we will see, this replacement of one most common ditransitive verb by
another should be viewed as a process which started and developed during the late
OE period.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, sellan has lost all of its original OE
meanings but one by c. 1300. The Middle English Dictionary provides 25 meanings
for yeven against only 5 for sellen, and out of these 5 remaining meanings only one
has the meaning of ‘voluntary giving’.

11. Giefan vs. sellan in the Lord’s Prayer
Here are several translations of a line from the Lord’s Prayer which also prove
that the replacement should have taken place during the OE period. Otherwise,
the OE authors would not have changed so radically the text of the prayer which
is by its nature a very conservative, formulaic piece of writing. The position of
sellan is challenged by giefan and geunnan:
‘give us today our daily bread’
‘syle us to dæg’ ‘geof us to dæg’
(The Rushworth Gospels) (Gloss to Eadwine’s Psalter)
‘sel us to dæge’ ‘geunn us to þissum dæge’
(Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies) (The Homilies of Wulfstan)

12. Frequencies for the verb SELLAN
N Fq /10,000 wds
Sellan
O1 10 45.6
60
O2 212 23 40
Fq / 10,000 wds
sellan
O3 385 15.3 20
0
O4 48 7.1 O1 O2 O3 O4
Subperiods of OE
Total 655
While the numerous instances of the usage of sellan in its simplex variants in the left-
hand column, especially in sections O2 and O3 prove it being a well-known verb during
these periods, the normalized frequencies lead us to dramatic results: the decline of
sellan is evident.

13. Frequencies for the verb GIEFAN
N Fq /10,000
wds Frequencies for giefan in comparison with sellan
O1 2 9
50
O2 17 2 40
Fq / 10,000 wds
30 sellan
O3 84 3.3 20 giefan
10
0
O4 20 2.9
O1 O2 O3 O4
Total 123 Subperiods of OE
Looking at the absolute number of occurrences, we might note that giefan was less
popular than sellan during all the subperiods of OE. The normalized frequencies do not
demonstrate any growth in its popularity. And towards the later subperiods of OE, the
frequency rates for both verbs almost coincide.

14. Prefixed variants of giefan and sellan
agiefan, ætgiefan, edgiefan, forgiefan, gegiefan, ofgiefan
asellan, besellan, forsellan, gesellan, ymbsellan [BT, DOE]
Of these are excluded: besellan, forsellan, ymbsellan and ofgiefan.
Their semantics is too distant from ‘voluntary giving’ →
they are unlikely to form ditransitive construction → out of the competition.
Gegiefan plus ætgiefan together account for only 6 examples, while for edgiefan there
are no examples at all.
→ Thus, let us focus on agiefan & forgiefan vs. asellan & gesellan

15. Prefixed variants of giefan and sellan
asellan & gesellan agiefan & forgiefan
(+ ætgiefan & gegiefan)
N Fq/ 10,000 wds N Fq/ 10,000 wds
O1 2 9.1 11 50
O2 75 8.1 73 7.9
O3 87 3.5 178 7
O4 7 1 42 6
Total 171 304

16. Frequencies for the prefixed variants of GIEFAN and SELLAN
Now, we can see that
Frequencies of the prefixed variants of giefan
forgiefan and agiefan are and sellan
very frequent (304 inst.), and
outnumber prefixed variants 60
gesellan &
Fq / 10,000 wds
of sellan (171 inst.). The asellan
40
figure which illustrates 20
frequencies for the prefixed agiefan,
0 ætgiefan,
variants looks quite different O1 O2 O3 O4 gegiefan &
from the previous one. Here, Subperiods of OE forgiefan
giefan is dominating, and the
frequency of sellan goes
down to 1.

17. Summing up. Points to consider
• Simplex sellan is evenly declining from O1 to O4.
• Prefixed variants of sellan are in decline,
too, with even lower frequencies.
• The frequencies of simplex giefan remain more or
less at the same low level from O1 to O4, the verb
is obviously not very popular.
• Interestingly, prefixed forms of giefan enjoy extremely
high frequencies during O1, then go down and maintain
the frequency of about 7 / 10,000 wds from O2 to O4 –
which is much higher than the frequencies of prefixed
‘sellan’ during O3-O4.

18. Possible explanations
• In OE, sellan (cf. Goth. saljan – to offer sacrifice; OHG sellen – to deliver up, etc.)
happened to develop a wider polysemy than any of its Germanic counterparts. At
the earlier stages of OE this verb could have been at demand as a translation
variant for numerous Latin verbs.
• Some forms of giefan have a number of homonyms (giefu ‘gift’, giefa ‘giver’, gief
‘if’). Tautology seems to be avoided with the help of sellan, cf.:
(6) him god sealde gife of heofonum (Dan 0043 (154))
- ‘God gave him a gift from heaven’

19. Possible explanations
• Later on, in search of more specified meanings Old English authors and scribes
turned to prefixed variants of the verb giefan. These make life easier in several
respects. Dieter Kastovsky defines a prefix as a functional equivalent to an adverb
when it modifies a verb [Kastovsky 1992]. An adverb in its turn may substitute for
the Recipient in a ditransitive clause. Thus, a simpler construction without the
Recipient is possible, cf.:
(7) & se biscop griðode and ageaf þone castel [Ø Rec] & forlet his biscoprice & ferde to
Normandige (ChronE (1087.78))
- ‘And that bishop made peace, and gave up the castle, and left his diocese and went to Normandy’
•Nothern influence should have also supported the rise of giefan. For instance, the
Swedish language has distinguished the meanings of giva ‘to give’ and sälja ‘to sell’
since the older times [SAOB s.v. giva, sälja, vb].

20. Data collated: giefan and sellan with and without their prefixes
(a-, ge-) sellan (a-, æt-, ge-, for-) giefan
N Fq/ 10,000 N Fq/ 10,000 wds
wds
O1 12 55 13 59
O2 287 31 90 9.7
O3 472 19 262 10.4
O4 55 8 62 9.2
Total 655+171= 123+304 =
826 427

21. Data collated: giefan & sellan with and without
their prefixes
80
Fq / 10,000 wds
60
40 (a-, ge-) sellan
20
0 (a-, æt-, ge-, for-)
O1 O2 O3 O4 giefan
Subperiods of OE

22. Conclusion
The verb giefan has developed
more prefixed variants than its
counterpart – sellan. As a result, giefan by
This could have been a way to c.1050-1150 (O4) has
1)avoid homonymy forced sellan out of its
original semantic field
2)specify the meaning ‘voluntary giving’
3)simplify the construction
The only meaning which either giefan, or its prefixed derivates never
developed was that of Lat. vendere. This semantic gap helped sellan
survive in the English language.

23. References
•BT - Toller T.N. Anglo-Saxon dictionary, based on the manuscript collections of the late Joseph
Bosworth, edited and enlarged by T. Northcote Toller. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1898 Denison, D.
English Historical Syntax: Verbal Constructions, London; New York: Longman, 1993.
•Dictionary of Old English. Ed. by A. Cameron, A.C. Amos and A. diPaolo Healey, http://doe.utoronto.ca
•Helsinki Corpus TEI XML Edition. (2011). First edition. Designed by Alpo Honkapohja, Samuli
Kaislaniemi, Henri Kauhanen, Matti Kilpiö, Ville Marttila, Terttu Nevalainen, Arja Nurmi, Matti Rissanen
and Jukka Tyrkkö. Implemented by Henri Kauhanen and Ville Marttila. Based on The Helsinki Corpus of
English Texts (1991). Helsinki: The Research Unit for Variation, Contacts and Change in English
(VARIENG), University of Helsinki.
•ICE-GB – The International Corpus of English (British Component) at http://ice-corpora.net/ice/index.htm
•Irvine, S. (ed.) The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. A Collaborative Edition. Volume 7. MS E. Cambridge:
D.S. Brewer, 2004.
•Kastovsky, D. Semantics and Vocabulary // The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol I. The
Beginnings to 1066. Ed. by R.M. Hogg. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
•The Middle English Dictionary at http://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/med/
•Mukherjee, J. English ditransitive verbs. Aspects of theory, description and a usage-based model.
Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2005.
•OED - The Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989.
•SAOB - Svenska Akademiens ordbok at http://g3.spraakdata.gu.se/saob/
•Visser F.Th. An Historical Syntax of the English Language. Part I. Leiden: Brill, 1963.
•Žigadlo V.N. Ways of emergence of prepositional complementation in Old English // Studies in the
English Philology. Vol.2. Leningrad, 1961. Pp. 99-114. In Russian. (Puti vozniknovenija predložnogo
upravlenija v drevneanglijskom yazike // Issledovanija po anglijskoj filologii).