A LINGUISTIC ATLAS OF EARLY MIDDLE ENGLISH
Margaret Laing

A LINGUISTIC ATLAS OF OLDER SCOTS
Keith Williamson

Institute for Historical Dialectology
University of Edinburgh



A Linguistic Atlas of Early Middle English (LAEME) and A Linguistic Atlas of Older Scots (LAOS) are being undertaken at the Institute for Historical Dialectology, English Language, School of Philosophy, Psychology and Language Sciences, University of Edinburgh.

    They continue an extensive research programme into variation in medieval written vernaculars that was started in the early 1950s by Professor Angus McIntosh of Edinburgh University and Professor Michael Samuels of Glasgow University (later joined by Professor Michael Benskin, now of Oslo University). This resulted in the publication in 1986 of A Linguistic Atlas of Late Mediaeval English.  Laing and Williamson are investigating (1) written English (ca. 1150–1300) over the two or three generations preceding the material in LALME; (2) Older Scots (ca. 1350–1700), which was given only token coverage in LALME.
    Close links are maintained with Glasgow University and with Professor Michael Benskin in Oslo University. The LAEME project enjoys support from Professor Jeremy Smith and Dr Kathryn Lowe (Glasgow). The Scots project has close collaborative links with Dr Anneli Meurman-Solin from the Department of English of the University of Helsinki, the creator of the Helsinki Corpus of Older Scots.  Further collaborative links have recently been established with Professor Roger Lass, University of Cape Town. Related investigations based in the Department of English Language, University of Glasgow are: the Middle English Grammar Project (Smith with Dr Simon Horobin (Glasgow) and Professor Merja Stenroos (Stavanger)) and the Historical Thesaurus Projects with Professor Christian Kay (Glasgow) and Professor Jane Roberts (London).
        The LALME project was largely carried out before the computer age.  It was made using filing slips and paper, pen or pencil. It collected data using the tool traditionally employed by dialectologists, the questionnaire. By 1987 computer technology had progressed to the point where we were able to use computers from the inception of the daughter projects and in a way that is integral to the methodology.  Instead of completing questionnaires comprising a set of predetermined ‘items’, we are developing a method whereby entire texts are transcribed and keyed onto computer disk and are analysed linguistically using programs written in-house. Each word or morpheme in a text is tagged according to its lexical meaning and grammatical function and each newly tagged text is added to the corpus of such texts. Programs then allow information on particular ‘items’ (defined by one or more tags) to be abstracted from the corpus to identify spatial or temporal distributions of the forms associated with the item.  Output may be produced in different formats including concordances, text profile comparisons, time charts and maps.
        This corpus method of analysis has considerable advantages over the traditional questionnaire. Selection of items for a questionnaire must be made before analysis begins, or very early in the investigation, on a trial and error basis. Results are restricted and provide only a fraction of the information achievable by the corpus method. Tagged texts in the corpus are immediately and constantly available to be processed and compared. Not all the material will be of use for dialectal work but this method allows items to be selected from a complete inventory of linguistic forms rather than from some predetermined sample. The method shortcircuits Gilliéron’s paradox that for results to be optimal a questionnaire ought to be devised after the investigation. The tagged corpora provide a detailed lexical-grammatical taxonomy that is useful not just for dialect mapping but for the historical study of phonology, morphology, syntax or semantics. The implementation of the corpus approach to linguistic analysis makes feasible a dynamic, interactive concept of dialect atlas. The corpus can be on CD or on a web-site for scholars to search the data themselves and make their own linguistic maps and time-charts.
        The Institute for Historical Dialectology has received support for the LAEME and LAOS projects from the Leverhulme Trust, the British Academy and the Carnegie Trust. We here also acknowledge with gratitude a recently awarded three-year grant from the Arts and Humanities Research Board.

Recent and forthcoming publications

Margaret Laing

2002 ‘Corpus-provoked Questions about Negation in early Middle English’, Language Sciences 24, 297-321.

2001 ‘Words reread. Middle English Writing Systems and the Dictionary’ [for DSNA conference celebrating the completion of the MED, 6-9 May 2001, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor], Linguistica e Filologia 13, 87-129.

2000a ‘“Never the twain shall meet” early Middle English the east west divide’, I. Taavitsainen, T. Nevalainen, P. Pahta and M. Rissanen (eds.) Placing Middle English in Context, 97–124. Topics in English Linguistics series. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

2000b ‘The Linguistic Stratification of the Middle English Texts in Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Digby 86’, Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 101, 523-569.

1999 ‘Confusion wrs Confounded: Litteral Substitution Sets in Early Middle English Writing Systems’, Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 100, 251–70.

Keith Williamson

2002 ‘The Dialectology of “English” North of the Humber, c. 1380-1500’ in  Teresa Fanego, Belen Méndez-Naya and Elena Seoane Posse (eds.) Sounds, Words, Texts and Change. Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 253-286.

2001 ‘Spatio-Temporal Aspects of Older Scots Texts’, Scottish Language, 20, 1-19.

2000a ‘Lexico-Grammatical Tags and the Phonetic and Syntactic Analysis of Medieval Texts’ in Christian Mair and Marianne Hundt (eds.) Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, Language and Computers: Studies in Practical Linguistics, no. 33. Amsterdam, Atlanta GA: Rodopi, 385-395.

2000b ‘Changing Spaces. Linguistic Relationships and the Dialect Continuum’ in I. Taavitsainen, T. Nevalainen, P. Pahta and M. Rissanen (eds.) Placing Middle English in Context, Topics in English Linguistics series. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 141-179.

Keith Williamson and Margaret Laing

(forthc) ‘The Archaeology of Middle English Texts’, delivered to the Symposium on Linguistic Categories and Classification, University of Glasgow, Scotland, 15–17 September 1999.