Netherlandic language research

[p. 19]

Chapter Four
Middle Netherlandic

1. Text editions

We do not intend to enumerate the existing editions of medieval texts, for that would be encroaching on the domain of literary history. Moreover, earlier editors did not pursue purely linguistic aims in their work, as they were endeavouring, some of them quite single-mindedly, to make medieval literature accessible. Thus, in older editions of, for example, chivalric romances - most of which are translations from or adaptations of French works - we find discussions on the relation to their models, and on the question whether the medieval Netherlandic author proves himself to be a literary artist or merely a slavish and clumsy translator. The editors also frequently investigate the development of the epic tradition, starting from the stage represented by their texts.

Literary taste is reflected in the choice of texts. At first, rhyming texts were evidently preferred. These are, indeed, the oldest, but this preference may be accounted for by the 19th century's lack of appreciation of edifying prose.

As sources for linguistic research, many editions of older texts have the drawback of being ‘critical’, that is to say: the editors, by comparing and evaluating the data of their manuscripts, tried to get as close as possible to the author's original text. In practising this ‘higher criticism’ they did not scruple to reject large fragments as being later interpolations. A striking example of this practice is furnished by J. Verdam's Theophilus-edition (Amsterdam, 1882), when we compare it with the edition by J. van Mierlo (Ledeberg-Ghent, 1941), which, as a result of recent changes in views and methods, shows a considerably greater deference to tradition.

But detailed textual criticism was also practised extensively, and editors took great liberties in their emendations. First they tried to ‘understand’ texts philologically, and then they let their own inventiveness come to the rescue when necessary. A scholar wanting to use the texts for grammatical research was therefore forced to unearth the old lines from their modern, ‘restored’ reading. Besides, spellings were often normalized, and differences of sound obscured in the

[p. 20]

process. Without any hesitation, abbreviations were expanded, so that subtle nuances were disguised or normalized by the personal interpretation of the editor. The result was often misleading, as in the case of the very frequent abbreviation for er, ar or aer, and with the indication of a nasal by means of a dash over the preceding letter, representing n as well as m, important letters for a correct appreciation of flexion endings. The editors always supplied the texts with punctuation, thereby forcing their own ideas about sentence structures on the readers.

While these drawbacks apply to texts edited by philologists for philological aims, they weigh even more heavily on non-literary works such as editions of charters and accounts designed for historians. A favourable exception is formed by the carefully edited De oudste Middelnederlandsche oorkonden, by H. Obreen and A. van Loey, V.M.V.A. 1934, 329 ff (also published separately).

A new attitude is apparent in the Middelnederlandse Marialegenden edited by C.G.N. de Vooys (2 vols, Leyden, 1903). R. Verdeyen and J. Endepols broke even more radically with the old methods in their edition - with commentary on the theme from a literary and historical point of view - of Tondalus' Visioen en St. Patricius' Vagevuur (2 vols, Ghent-The Hague, 1914/17). In it, the versions are found printed side by side. Views on the methods used in text editing changed to such an extent that J.W. Muller thought it necessary to defend at length the case of a critical edition, in his Critische commentaar op Van den Vos Reinaerde (Utrecht, 1917). G.G. Kloeke brought out a fully diplomatic reprint of Karel ende Elegast (Leyden, 1948), in the series Textus Minores, and A. van Loey did the same, in the same series, for Die Borchgravinne van Vergi (Leyden, 1949). A diplomatic edition - but for some punctuation marks - is also that of Sint Servaes Legende by G.A. van Es, in collaboration with G.I. Lieftinck and A.F. Mirande (Antwerp-Brussels-Ghent-Louvain, 1950); to Muller's critical edition of Reinaert a diplomatic one, giving all the texts of all available manuscripts, was added by W. Gs. Hellinga, Van den Vos Reinaerde, I. Teksten (Zwolle, 1952).

The handsome editions of Beatrijs by A.L. Verhofstede (Antwerp, 1947), of Esmoreit by A. de Maeyer and R. Roemans (Antwerp, 1948), and of Mariken van Nieumeghen by J. van Mierlo, Luc. Debaene and A.L. Verhofstede (Antwerp, 1951) give a photographic reproduction on every left-hand page, and the edited text,

[p. 21]

with abbreviations expanded and punctuation marks put in, on the opposite page. The editions should be highly appreciated as a demonstration of the way in which photography allows the reader to see the texts as they were written down. They also contain explanatory notes, which in the third are better than in the other two volumes. A similar edition, though of somewhat earlier date, is that in facsimile with transcription, of Die Haager Liederhandschrift by E.F. Kossmann (The Hague, 1940), a collection of Netherlandic and German poems.

A recent publication of non-literary texts is the splendid book De Oorkondentaal in Belgisch-Limburg van circa 1350 to 1400 by Joseph Moors (Tongres, 1952), where the charters have been edited on wellconsidered principles, so as to combine readability with an accurate rendering of the texts.

The deficiencies of the earlier editions stand out clearly against these, unfortunately few, attempts at providing absolutely reliable text editions. In addition to their habit of emendating and making critical changes in the texts, the older editors also had shortcomings when it came to palaeography. The complaints voiced by W. de Vreese in his Paradox over den grooten nood der Nederlandsche philologie (Handelingen van de Maatschappij der Nederlandsche Letterkunde 1932/33) may seem somewhat paradoxically exaggerated, but there is no doubt that a good deal of work will have to be re-done if the justifiable demands of modern linguistic and historical research are to be met.

In striking contrast to the prevailing conservative attitude to the manuscript tradition stands a recent edition, prepared with admirable skill, a purposefully and radically critical one, namely that of Sente Servas - Sanctus Servatius by Th. Frings and Gabriele Schieb (Part I of Die epischen Werke des Henric van Veldeken, Halle-Saale, 1956). The editors have made an attempt to reduce the text of a 15th century ms. to the author's original, mainly by comparing fragments dating from ca. 1200.

W. de Vreese has catalogued and described Netherlandic manuscripts in the possession of libraries, archives, museums and private owners all over Europe. This work, Bibliotheca Neerlandica Manuscripta (B.N.M.), deposited in manuscript with the Leyden University Library, is invaluable but, as is only to be expected of such a gigantic work done by one man, it is of uneven quality and not fit for publication in its present state. G.I. Lieftinck is at present investigating

[p. 22]

the overwhelming mass of de Vreese's material, and its publication in a suitable form is being planned. P.J.H. Vermeeren, in his Amsterdam doctoral thesis De Bibliotheca Neerlandica Manuscripta van Willem de Vreese (privately published, 1953), gives a complete inventory of the Bibliotheca, with suggestions as to how its material could be supplemented and brought up to date, so as to develop it into a fully reliable apparatus of documentation for Middle Netherlandic philology.

Meanwhile, Lieftinck, who had earlier, in the introduction to De Middelnederlandsche Tauler-handschriften (Groningen-Batavia, 1936), demonstrated his interest and skill in handling manuscripts, has described the manuscripts in the possession of the ‘Maatschappij der Nederlandsche Letterkunde’ and preserved in the Leyden University Library, in Vol. V of the series Codices Manuscripti. In Codicum in finibus Belgarum ante annum 1550 conscriptorum qui in bibliotheca universitatis asservantur, part I, are treated Codices 168-360 societatis cui nomen Maatschappij der Nederlandsche Letterkunde (Leyden, 1948).

2. Text interpretation. Anthologies

The need for glossaries decreased as Verdam's Mnl. Wb. (see Ch. I) neared its completion. And so, Overdiep, in his edition of Ferguut (Leyden, 1924), omitted the glossary Verdam had added to the previous edition (Leyden, 1910), and gave instead an extensive stylistic and syntactic introduction on ‘de stijl van het gedicht’. The Bloemlezing uit Middelnederlandsche dichters, an excellent book for the study of Middle Netherlandic, first edited by E. Verwijs, 4th edition by F.A. Stoett (Zutfen, 1924, 3 vols.), had for its 4th volume a comprehensive Woordenlijst (3rd edition by Stoett, Zutfen, 1915, reprinted in 1940). The completely revised edition, with the new title Bloemlezing uit de Middelnederlandse dichtkunst, by C.C. de Bruin (3 vols, Zutfen, 1956/57/58), will contain no glossary. C.C. de Bruin's collection Middelnederlands geestelijk proza (Zutfen, 1940, 1 vol.) has no annotations, nor has the Middelnederlands Leerboek by A. van Loey (Antwerp-Groningen, 1947), which exemplifies the new methods of research by giving, not only literary texts, but also charters and other official and commercial documents. The Bloemlezing by A.C. Bouman (see under 3), provided with explanatory footnotes, deserves mention as a first introduction to the study of Middle Netherlandic.

[p. 23]

However, even though Verdam's Mnl. Wb. is now completed, there is room for annotated editions of difficult texts. A case in point is the mystic poetry and prose of Hadewijch, whose works have been edited by J. van Mierlo with an excellent commentary. His edition of Hadewijch's Strophische Gedichten (2 vols: Inleiding and Text en Commentaar, Antwerp-Brussels-Ghent-Louvain, 1942) has footnotes and a glossary. Hadewijch's Brieven (1948) and her Mengeldichten (1952) were prepared by van Mierlo in the same manner. Earlier editions by van Mierlo are those of Theophilus (V.M.V.A., 1941) and Roelandslied (V.M.V.A., 1935), both with annotations at the foot of the page.

The monumental edition of Jan van Ruusbroec's mystic prose by J.B. Poukens, J. van Mierlo, D.A. Stracke, L. Reypens and M. Schurmans, Jan van Ruusbroec. Werken (4 vols, Malines-Amsterdam, 1932/34; 2nd edition, 1944/48), chiefly aims at an interpretation of the religious aspect; apart from that we find only short discussions of the mss. in the introduction to each volume, and a glossary.

The importance of C.C. de Bruin's edition De Middelnederlandse vertaling van De Imitatione Christi (Leyden, 1954), lies in the first place in his convincing refutation of the peculiar ideas J. van Ginneken had cherished, and ingeniously defended, as to the origin of the Imitatio. The book also deserves to be mentioned here as a fine specimen of competent editing: it has excellent notes and a glossary.

The poems by the 15th century ‘rederijker’ Anthonis de Roovere have been carefully edited and annotated by J.J. Mak, in his De gedichten van Anthonis de Roovere (Zwolle, 1955). C. Kruyskamp collected and annotated De Middelnederlandse boerden, with an index of the words explained in the notes (The Hague, 1957).

Of many medieval works of some literary importance we find annotated editions, intended for a wider public, especially for the use in schools. The fine edition of Esmoreit by R. Verdeyen, in the series Van alle tijden (Groningen-Batavia, later Djakarta), has been reprinted many times, as have those of Beatrijs and Reinaert, both of them with extensive commentary by D.C. Tinbergen. Future editions of the last two texts will be taken care of by L.M. van Dis. For the series Lyceumherdrukken, H.J.E. Endepols prepared Elckerlijc, and many school editions appeared, in the same series, of Mariken van Nieumeghen. In recent years the series Klassieke Galerij (Antwerp) has presented us with several texts, provided with introductions of

[p. 24]

varying qualitiy, and often with bibliographies. In this series we also find texts that are not among those ordinarily read in schools, such as the Roman van Torec, edited by A.F.W. Bellemans, and De Borchgravinne van Vergi, by P. de Keyser. Mention has already been made of the series Textus Minores, intended for use in universities.

That the existence of such an excellent dictionary as the Mnl. Wb., with its copious quotations, does not render commentaries on texts superfluous was also proved by J.W. Muller in his Exegetische Commentaar (Leyden, 1942) on a popular text of literary importance, the Reinaert, which has been the subject of widespread and penetrating study. Even the writings of Willem van Hildegaersberch and Dirc Potter, who do not belong to the oldest period and do not have the reputation of being particularly difficult, continually present cruces interpretum. We hope, and expect, that the text interpretation as shown by devoted philologists of the older generation, which for some time past has fallen into disuse owing to the urgent need for reliable editions, will come into its own again with the younger generation. Grammatical research in the proper sense cannot well be made without a penetrating study of the texts concerned, and a conscientious weighing of what the author wants to, and is able to express by means of his linguistic material. This applies especially to syntactical studies, but neither morphology nor purely phonic matters can be viewed apart from syntax.

We have to be grateful, therefore, for the series Zwolse Drukken en Herdrukken voor de Maatschappij der Nederlandse Letterkunde te Leiden, the editors of which are professors W.J.M.A. Asselbergs, W.Gs. Hellinga, G. Kuiper, P. Minderaa and W.A.P. Smit. This very active group has, in the course of only few years, enriched our bookshelves with several editions of medieval and later texts, most of them excellently annotated and provided with scholarly introductions; quite a few also have an extensive glossary. Of those belonging to the Middle Netherlandic period we might mention the following: Lancelot en het Hert met de Witte Voet by Maartje Draak (Zwolle, 1953); Maerlant's Sinte Franciscus Leven by P. Maximilianus O.F.M. Cap. (2 vols, 1954); Het Spel vanden Heilighen Sacramente vander Nyeuwervaert by W.J.M.A. Asselbergs and A.P. Huysmans (1955); De Jeeste van Walewein en het Schaakbord by G.A. van Es (2 vols, 1957, with a very worth-while chapter on the punc-

[p. 25]

tuation used in the ms.); Hein van Aken, Vierde Martijn by W.E. Hegman (1958); De fragmenten van de Tweede Rose by K. Heeroma (1958; in a lengthy chapter the editor tries to reduce the spellings of the mss. to their phonemic basis).

The same publishers and editors are responsible for a more popular series of texts, called Klassieken uit de Nederlandse Letterkunde, intended for a wider public of readers and for schools. The first numbers had modernized spelling, later on this practice was given up.

The Swedish scholar Lars Hermodsson edited Dat Boec van den Houte (Uppsala-Wiesbaden, 1959), with an authoritative introduction, in which among other things the language of the mss. is discussed at length.

In the present book, text editions and text interpretation have been treated rather summarily, because to try for completeness here would be to step over the borderline between linguistic and aesthetic evaluation. There really are, of course, no sharp dividing lines between the two, an aesthetic appreciation of literary texts is impossible without a careful study of the raw material used by the author: language.

3. Grammatical handbooks

The first grammar of Middle Netherlandic was written by J. Franck. In this Mittelniederländische Grammatik (1883, revised edition 1910, Leipzig) an immense mass of material was incorporated, in the solid neo-grammarian manner. As a didactic work it has a great drawback in that it presupposes an extensive knowledge of Germanic, which makes it unsuitable for students. And the extremely precise phraseology has resulted in a very complicated sentence structure. The composition of the book, too, is open to justifiable criticism; the German Franck, while giving a clear outline of the development from Old Germanic to Middle Netherlandic, only rarely extends it to Modern Netherlandic. As characteristic both of the impression made by Franck on beginners and of Schönfeld's modesty it may be mentioned that the latter designed the first edition of his Historische Grammatica (see Chapter II) as an introduction to Franck's Mittelniederländische Grammatik. Even for advanced students it was difficult to handle, and the professional man of research painfully felt the lack of references to the places the examples were taken from. In spite of these objections, Franck's book, never avoiding difficult questions, always careful and critical, is a standard work of the first order.

[p. 26]

W.L. van Helten's Middelnederlandsche Spraakkunst (Groningen, 1887) has the great advantage that it supplies the sources of its quotations, thus enabling the user to date and localize sounds and forms. As regards system and composition, however, van Helten's book, which does not even contain a table of contents, is far inferior to Franck's. It is a rich but disorderly collection of details, in which even the specialist can only find his way with the greatest difficulty, however much he may appreciate the book as an indispensable complement to Franck.

Both Franck and van Helten confined themselves to phonology and morphology. Syntax was dealt with by F.A. Stoett in his Middelnederlandsche Syntaxis (3rd edition, The Hague, 1923). This book has serious shortcomings. It is written as a textbook, in which Middle Netherlandic is treated as a more or less ‘foreign’ language, and it especially elaborates those points in which that language differs from ‘common’ Netherlandic. Furthermore, its peculiarly static conception fails to do justice to the changes that took place during the three centuries of the Middle Netherlandic period. The abundant quotations are given without indication of the sources, an impediment that weighs more heavily in this book than in Franck. We must admit, however, that Stoett is useful for teaching purposes. The extensive index of words and subjects facilitates the looking up of syntactical facts in their context. Stoett, who had few predecessors in his field, and most of the time had to find his own way, has given us a useful book that has as yet not been surpassed. In view of the peculiar difficulties inherent in the study of Middle Netherlandic syntax, it is not likely that it will soon be replaced by a work conforming to the demands of present-day Netherlandics.

The Middelnederlandse Grammatika by the South Africans T.H. le Roux and J.J. le Roux (3rd edition, Pretoria, 1951) is based, as regards phonology and morphology, on Schönfeld's Historische Grammatica and Franck's Mittelniederländische Grammatik, but also deals with syntactical matters. It is a practical handbook, not only for South African students; from a didactical point of view it is better than both Franck and van Helten.

A more original work is the Vormleer van het Middelnederlandsch der XIIIe eeuw by G.S. Overdiep, seen through the press by G.A. van Es (Antwerp, 1946). This book was to be the first part of a ‘Stylistische grammatica’ of Middle Netherlandic; a second volume,

[p. 27]

on syntax, has not, so far, appeared. The author founded his grammar on a relatively small number of rhymed texts, wholly excluding the prose of the older charters, a restriction that can be objected to on good grounds. The Vormleer contains many interesting observations, but as a handbook for university students it is too subjective and uneven. The scholar can appreciate it as an interesting specimen of Overdiep's very personal methods.

A. van Loey, in his concise Middelnederlandse Spraakkunst (I Vormleer; II Klankleer; 2nd edition, Groningen-Antwerp, 1955/7), tries to meet both didactic and scholarly demands. Taking the language of the 13th century as his basis, excluding as far as possible all historical knowledge of previous periods, van Loey presents, in the main body of his work, the principal grammatical facts, and in his extensive notes he deals with the details, as well as with doubtful points requiring further investigation. Building on the study of charters, partly the work of others but mainly his own, he gives, within the small scope of his book, more concrete information about dialectal nuances in Mnl. than the older grammars, which contain only vague generalities on the subject. Van Loey's Spraakkunst, concise but thorough, is an excellent manual for beginners; it is also valuable for specialists, though the latter cannot do without Franck and van Helten because of the larger amount of material they contain and their historical treatment of the subject.

The short grammatical introduction given by A.C. Bouman in his Middelnederlandse Bloemlezing met Grammatica (2nd edition, Zutfen, 1948), mainly intended as a guide to the reading of the fragments in the anthology, can be of use for readers such as historians, who do not intend to make a profound study of Middle Netherlandic.

The very short Introduction à l'étude du Moyen-Néerlandais by A. van Loey (Paris, 1951) gives grammar in compact form, and some literary and non-literary fragments for reading.

4. Language of individual authors and texts. Dialects. Syntax

Text editors often provide some linguistic data about the work they are dealing with: a description of the orthography of the ms., an attempt to localize the text and a survey of the principal grammatical, mostly phonological, peculiarities. In addition, there are monographs on the language of one author or of one special text.

A forerunner in this field of research was J.H. Kern, who pre-

[p. 28]

ceded his edition of the Limburgsche Sermoenen by a Klankleer der Limburgsche Sermoenen, also published separately (Groningen, 1891). Other monographs of this kind are the Leipzig doctoral thesis Lautund Flexionslehre der Sprache der St. Servatius-legende by F. Leviticus (Haarlem, 1899) and E. de Neef's Klank- en vormleer van het gedicht van den VII vroeden binnen Rome (Ghent, 1896). H. Meert wrote a Vormleer van de taal van Jan van Ruusbroec (Ghent, 1901).

E. Emonds, in De legende van Sinte Kunera in de middeleeuwen (Leyden doctoral thesis, 1922, no place of publication mentioned), made some modest attempts to trace dialectal peculiarities in the mss. W.H. Beuken added a linguistic survey of Van den Levene ons Heren to his edition of that text (Purmerend, 1929). G.S. Overdiep, who had earlier published De vormen van het aoristisch praeteritum in de Middelnederlandsche epische poëzie (Rotterdam, 1914), prefaced his Ferguut, which we have already mentioned, with a discussion of ‘de stijl van het gedicht’. The Swedish scholar J. Holmberg edited Eine mittelniederfränkische Übertragung des Bestiaire d'Amour (Uppsala, 1925). Although this text was written outside the Netherlandic linguistic area, Holmberg's book deserves mention here for its extensive comparison, from a grammatical point of view, of his text with Middle Netherlandic proper. In Vol. I - published in 1939- of his edition of Dirc van Delf's Tafel van den Kersten Ghelove (4 vols., Antwerp-Nimeguen-Utrecht, 1937-39), L.M. Fr. Daniëls discusses ‘De taal der handschriften’. J.J. Mak, in the chapter ‘Taal en vertaaltechniek’ of De Dietse vertaling van Gerlach Peters' Soliloquium (Utrecht doctoral thesis, privately published, 1936), gives some examples of East Middle Netherlandic peculiarities, phonological and morphological, in two manuscripts; in addition, he wrote a noteworthy chapter on the Dutch translator's linguistic attitude towards his Latin original. J.M. Willeumier-Schalij gives a chapter on ‘De localisatie van het hs. H’, a survey of the vowel and consonant system, in her edition of Dat Boec der Minnen (Leyden, 1946).

J. Jacobs is credited with having been the first systematical investigator of dialectal variants in non-literary texts. His prize-winning essay Vergelijkende Klank- en Vormleer der Middelvlaamsche dialecten, of which only the Klankleer (Ghent, 1911) appeared, is a thorough and accurate study of spellings in Middle Flemish charters, with conclusions about the corresponding sounds.

[p. 29]

The question Werd de volkstaal gewijzigd in de loop der tijden? (V.M.V.A., 1924, 163 ff) was answered in the negative for West Flemish by Jacobs. He tried to defend this proposition about the linguistic conservatism of Flemish in his historical dialect anthology Het Westvlaamsch van de oudste tijden tot heden (Groningen, 1927). In this volume we find a herbarium in a language which Jacobs, rather rashly, calls Old Flemish. The provenance of this herbarium was discussed by him in V.M.V.A. 1930, 189 ff, its date in V.M.V.A. 1931, 213 ff.

A valuable contribution is the study by A. van Loey on Zuid-West-Brabantsch in de XIIIe en XIVe eeuw (Tongres, 1937), in which the author, basing himself on non-literary texts - accurately dated and localized - opened up new vistas on the historical phonology of Middle Netherlandic. J. van Ginneken, in collaboration with his pupils, described De taalschat van het Limburgsche Leven van Jezus (Maastricht, 1938). Both morphology and syntax were dealt with by van Ginneken's pupils Elis. Allard, Een grammaticaal onderzoek van het proza van Hadewych (Amsterdam, 1937), and Maria van der Kallen, Een grammaticaal en rhythmisch onderzoek van Hadewijchs poëzie (The Hague, 1938), a large section of which is devoted to the verse technique of the poetess.

A. Kessen, editor of Het Cancellierboek (Leyden, 1931; with a chapter on ‘De taal der Middelnederlandsche handschriften’), wrote an article Over de taal der oudste Limburgse niet-literaire bronnen (Ts. LIII, 280 ff). For Limburg, the painstakingly written ‘lautliche und orthographische Untersuchung’ of Venloer Stadt-Texte (Nimeguen, 1949) by S.G.W. van der Meer, is of importance. J. Moors, in his above-mentioned edition of charters from Belgian Limburg, De oorkondentaal in Belgisch-Limburg van circa 1350 tot 1400, deals thoroughly with their ‘woordenschat en taal’, pp. 341-439. In the same series (Bouwstoffen en Studiën voor de Geschiedenis en de Lexicografie van het Nederlands) appeared H. Vangassen's Bouwstoffen tot de historische taalgeografie van het Nederlands; Hertogdom Brabant (Tongres, 1954). For practical reasons, the author could not reproduce the numerous Brabant charters, so he made excerpts from them, giving instances of the styles of writing in the various towns and periods, thus preparing the way for future students of dialectological and historical phonology.

A short but very scholarly study of West Flemish charters, relating

[p. 30]

particularly to some important phonological aspects, is P. van Haverbeke's prize-winning essay De 13e-eeuwse Middelnederlandse Oorkondentaal te Brugge en Omgeving (Ghent, 1955).

Two authors from the province of Holland were discussed in doctoral theses, one by miss S. Hofker, De taal van Melis Stoke (Groningen, 1908), and one by W.F. Tiemeyer, Klankleer der gedichten van Willem van Hildegaersberch (Amsterdam, 1916). K. Heeroma's Hollandse dialektstudies, which we shall discuss in a later chapter, covers the period down to the Middle Ages.

Edda Tille's Zur Sprache der Urkunden des Herzogtums Geldern (Bonn-Leipzig, 1925) shows the rivalry between western-Hollandic and eastern-German influences on the language of Guelders. J.J. Mak described Het vocalisme in beklemde syllaben van enige Oostmiddelnederlandse geschriften uit de kring der moderne devotie, in Ts. LV, 67 ff. N. van Wijk aimed at promoting the dialectology of the Middle Ages with his edition of Het Getijdenboek van Geert Grote (The Hague, 1940). It is on this edition that B. van den Berg based his article Geert Grote's psalmvertaling, Ts. LXI, 259 ff.

One of the earliest publications on Mnl. syntax is the doctoral thesis by G. Engels, Over het gebruik van den conjunctief en de casus bij Maerlant (Groningen, 1895), an instructive study on the great influence of rhyme on the use of the conjunctive. A.C. Bouman's thesis Bijdrage tot de syntaxis der ‘dat’-zinnen in het Germaansch (Utrecht, 1918) restricts itself almost entirely to the Mnl. period. J. Jacobs wrote an essay on De regeering der voorzetsels in de Middelnederlandsche teksten in V.M.V.A. 1922, 1924 and 1925.

More recent works, deriving from the syntactic school of Overdiep, are those by L.I.H. Albering, Vergelijkend-syntactische studie van den Renout en het Volksboek der Heemskinderen (Groningen, 1934), in which the first thousand lines of the Renout-fragments are compared with the corresponding prose in the chap-book; and the doctoral thesis by Overdiep's successor to be, G.A. van Es, De attributieve genitief in het Middelnederlandsch (Assen, n.d. [1938]), based on a number of fragments from Mnl. texts, both rhymed and in prose, with varying contents. G. Stellinga's study De abele spelen: zinsvormen en zinsfuncties (Groningen, 1955) is similar to Albering's in conception and outline. In so far as the syntactic observations of Overdiep and his pupils are based on rhymed texts, they should be accepted with some reserve.

[p. 31]

C. Minis wrote a lengthy article on the ἀπὸ ϰοινοῦ-construction, especially in the Ferguut, for Ts. LXII, 161 ff. His principal views on this construction in general, not only in Middle Netherlandic, are to be found in a shorter article in Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache LXXIV, 285 ff. Other noteworthy contributions to the study of Mnl., and partly to that of 17th century and Modern Netherlandic syntax, are those by G.A. van Es, Oorsprong en functies van het voegwoord al, in the periodical It Beaken 1949, 106 ff, and, connected with it, but of wider scope, Syntactische vormen van de concessieve modaliteit in het Nederlands, Ts. LXVIII, 253 ff. Van Es recently continued and expanded these syntactical investigations, in his excellent article Voegwoordelijke verbindingen ter uitdrukking van de conditionele (hypothetische) modaliteit in het Nederlands, Ts. LXXI, 1 ff. This study, based on historical principles, starts from Mnl., dealing especially with that period, but also sketches the development through later centuries up to present-day Netherlandic. A pupil of van Es, G. Schmidt, labels his Groningen doctoral thesis De concessieve voegwoordelijke bijzin in het Nederlands van de middeleeuwen en de zeventiende eeuw (1958) an extension of the above-mentioned articles by van Es. Later studies by van Es, on Voegwoordelijke verbindingen voor aspectische functies der simultaniteit (Ts.. LXXII, 241 ff), de progressiviteit (doe en als) (Ts. LXXIII, 16 ff), and concurrenten van doe en als (Ts. LXXIV, 20 ff, 189 ff) are limited to the Mnl. period.

A syntactic study, based exclusively on prose-texts, is that by J.A.M. Pulles, Structuurschema's van de zin in Middelnederlands geestelijk proza (Nimeguen, 1950); its material has been taken from C.C. de Bruin's anthology Middelnederlands geestelijk proza, mentioned earlier. J. Heemstra, in Über den Gebrauch der attributiven Partizipialkonstruktionen in der niederländischen und hochdeutschen Prosa (Haarlem, 1925), devoted one chapter to ‘Die älteste niederländische Prosa’.

From the Swedish school of J. Holmberg comes the highly interesting inquiry by L. Hermodsson, Reflexive und intransitive Verba im älteren Westgermanischen (Uppsala, 1952), in which Middle Netherlandic plays an important part; it shows the author to be well acquainted with Netherlandic and linguistic research in the Netherlands. A special section is devoted to the penetration of the High German reflexive pronoun sich into later Netherlandic.

[p. 32]

Several articles by L.C. Michels, dealing with different aspects of Middle Netherlandic, have been collected in his Filologische Opstellen I (Zwolle, 1957).

5. Lexicology

In this field we have the Bijdragen tot de middelnederlandse woordgeografie en woord-chronologie, articles by de Vooys published in Ts. The vocabulary of Dutch mystics is discussed by the same scholar in an article Meister Eckart en de Nederlandse mystiek, published in Nederlands Archief voor Kerkgeschiedenis III, 8 ff, and in Johannes Ruusbroec en de Duitsche mystiek by A.C. Bouman, Ts. XLI, 1 ff and XLII, 81 ff. A.A. Verdenius wrote Lexicologische aantekeningen bij stichtelijk proza uit de Middeleeuwen, Ts. XL, 193 ff, XLI, 115 ff and XLII, 131 ff. S. Axters included a chapter on ‘De zichzelfwording van de Nederlandsche scholastieke vaktaal’ in the excellent introduction to his Scholastiek Lexicon (Antwerp, 1937). C.C. de Bruin's doctoral thesis Middelnederlandse vertalingen van het Nieuwe Testament I (Groningen-Batavia, 1934) also deserves to be mentioned because of his comparison of several bible translations with regard to their choice of words. De Bruin not only considered lexicological facts, but also discussed general grammatical characteristics of his texts.

Another aspect of lexicology is dealt with by J.W. Muller in his article Over ware en schijnbare gallicismen in het Middelnederlandsch, N.Tg. XIV, 1 ff, 65 ff.

A first attempt at producing an ideological dictionary of Louvain charters is L. De Man's Bijdrage tot een systematisch glossarium van de Brabantse oorkondentaal, Leuvens archief van circa 1300 tot 1550, Part I, (Tongres, 1956).