hand, approaches the loose construction of Alfred at times in sentences similar to the following:

Now have I that swerd that somtyme was the good knyghtes Balyn le Seveage, and he (who) was a passynge good man of his handes 618:6.

45. Inasmuch as Chaucer wrote at a time not far removed from the Old English period, it is worthy of notice that the word order in his relative clauses is similar, as a rule, to that of Modern English, rather than to that of Old English. But few examples are to be found in which the transposed order of Old English occurs:

Who me chastyseth, I him hate Ro. of R. 3331. For both have I the wordes and sentence Of him that at the seintes reverence The storie wroot S. N. T. 82. Occasionally this transposition is due to the requirements of rime:

Withinne the cloistre blisful of thy sydes Took mannes shap the eternal love and pees, That of the tryne compas lord and gyde is S. N. T. 45.

46. The fact that that could not be preceded by prepositions, unless it was equivalent to that which, was probably responsible for the following divergences from modern

use:

A. The preposition stands near the end of the clause
after the verb:

And blessed be the yok that we been inne Mar.
T. 593.

B. The preposition precedes its verb:

The goode folk, that Poule to preched Ro. of R. 6679.

Note. B occurs usually with verbs of telling, knowing, etc. Occasionally the verb follows the preposition to meet the requirements of rime.

1.

tive.

SUMMARY

That is the most frequently employed Chaucerian relaIt is used in restrictive and non-restrictive clauses alike and refers occasionally to entire sentences or sentence members.

2. The old demonstrative relative he does not appear in Chaucer.

3. The pure interrogative-relative forms, who, which, what, though generally supposed to be derived from general or indefinite relatives, are derived from interrogative pronouns used in complete or emphatic clauses in indirect discourse.

4. Who, as a pure relative, in the nominative case, does not appear in Skeat's edition. Its oblique forms are used frequently to refer to persons or personified objects, but very rarely to things. In an indefinite or general relative sense, it occurs very frequently. When thus used, it is often followed by a personal pronoun in the correlative sentence.

5. What occurs very rarely as a pure relative. Its use as an indefinite or general relative and as a relative adjective is frequent.

6.

Which is used both as a relative pronoun and as a relative adjective. It rarely refers to superlatives and interrogative pronouns. It is constantly employed to refer to sentences and sentence members..

7. Whether does not occur as a pure relative.

8. Which has greater carrying power than that, and frequently replaces it in a sequence of relative clauses referring to one antecedent.

9. The general relatives whoso, whatso, and their variant forms, occur frequently. Whichso and whichsoever do not

occur.

10. Relation is very frequently expressed through as and relative adverbs.

11. Chaucer's relative ellipses present no special peculiarities.

12. Chaucer occasionally uses a singular predicate in his relative clauses after a plural antecedent. His usage, in this respect, is not unlike that of Malory or Shakespeare. In a very few examples, he uses a plural predicate in the relative clause after a singular antecedent. When the antecedent is of the first or second person singular, Chaucer rarely violates the concord of number and person in his relative predicates. Relatives referring to collective nouns are as a rule followed by plural predicates.

13. The structure of Chaucer's relative sentence is at times very different from that of Modern English. The most striking differences appear in the frequent use of the oblique forms of personal pronouns used in connection with the relative that, rarely which, to express the case relation of the relative to its antecedent. The combination that he ne, etc., after negative statements and rhetorical questions, is the equivalent of the modern but, meaning who not.

14. Chaucer exhibits a fine feeling for relative subordination. He permits anacolutha to appear but rarely and joins his dependent clauses to his principle clauses by a hypotactic nexus of which Malory was wholly incapable.

15. Though Chaucer was not, in actual time, very far removed from the Old English period, his word order in relative clauses, when not influenced by the demands of rime, is very similar to that of Modern English. Occasionally, the old transposed order occurs in the relative clause. That, when the equivalent of that which or what, is frequently preceded by a preposition. In very rare examples, that is followed by a verbal combination like of speke, in which the preposition precedes the verb instead of following it.

LIFE

I was born in Lenoir, N. C., December 27th, 1876. After attending several private schools, I entered Haverford College, Haverford, Penn., in September of 1895. From this institution, where I held the positions of assistant librarian and private tutor in Latin, I received the "Class of 1896 Latin Prize", in June, 1897. Leaving Haverford at the end of my third year, I entered the senior class of the University of North Carolina, at Chapel Hill, the following September. I received the degree of A.B. in 1899, and was awarded the "Hume Essay Medal" for special work in English. During the year 1899-1900, I was Principal of Vine Hill Male Academy, Scotland Neck, N. C., a position which I resigned to become instructor in English at Catawba College, Newton, N. C. In September, 1901, I returned to the University to become its librarian, a position which I still hold. In 1902, I received the degree of A.M. after pursuing graduate courses in English, Greek, and Latin. In 1904, I received "The Early English Text Society Prize" for work in Old and Middle English.

To all of my instructors, and especially to Dr. C. Alphonso Smith, Dr. Thomas Hume, and Professor W. D. Toy, under whom it has been my privilege to pursue the courses leading to this dissertation, I am deeply indebted, both for wise guidance in study and for the sympathetic interest and unfailing kindness which have at all times characterized their relations to me. LOUIS ROUND WILSON.

Chapel Hill, N. C.,
May 15, 1905.