[Mova](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/) · [this page in HTML](https://mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/beck-2023-old-english-em-swa-em/) [home](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/) / [docs](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/) / [papers](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/) / [English](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/en/) / On Old English swa 'so' # On Old English *swa* 'so' **Authors:** Sigrid Beck · **Year:** 2023 · **Venue:** Glossa: a journal of general linguistics **Link:** [glossa-journal.org/article/id/5755](https://www.glossa-journal.org/article/id/5755/) · **Licence:** [CC BY 4.0](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) [**0** citations](https://openalex.org/works?filter=cites:W4317772476) openalex-snapshot · 2026-10-14[Glossa: a journal of general linguistics](https://openalex.org/S4210226983)[licence](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) - [Publisher's page](https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.5755) - [PDF](https://www.glossa-journal.org/article/5755/galley/22920/download) - [DOI 10.16995/glossa.5755](https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.5755) - [OpenAlex](https://openalex.org/W4317772476) **Authors (1)** 1. [Beck, Sigrid](https://openalex.org/A5004250736) [ORCID](https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1077-4048) · h 29 · 3840 citations · 134 works Citations and author metrics from openalex-snapshot (2026-10-14); authors with the same name are not always told apart. ## What it is about The paper asks what the Old English word *swa* 'so' contributes to sentence meaning. A corpus survey collects its uses: pronominal uses, subordinate clauses of manner, equatives, consecutives and conditionals. A compositional analysis of each use reduces its contribution to two basic functions: marking definiteness and marking predicate abstraction. The two can be covert, and the author argues that this links the uses and gives a path to reanalysis and semantic change. The paper is a semantic analysis with no numerical evaluation. ## Ideas - I1. Give function words a sense table, not only a form list. For English *so* and *such* in the Early Modern register, each occurrence gets one sense label from a small closed set (degree, manner clause, equative, consecutive, conditional). Keep the labels in [10. Vocabulary: archaic words and false friends](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/languages/en-x-emode/10-vocabulary/) and let `en/src/emode.rs` carry the sense next to the form. Measure: the share of *so* tokens in [14. Sample texts, read word by word](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/languages/en-x-emode/14-sample-texts/) that receive a sense. - I2. Use the paper's use inventory as a test set: one sentence per use type. Each must get its own sense label. A control in which the sense labels are shuffled must score at chance. - I3. Mark entries where the function is present but no overt form appears (covert definiteness or abstraction). Such entries are candidates for the ellipsis analysis; list them, but do not add them as rules until a count supports them. ## For Mova The relevant chapters are [10. Vocabulary: archaic words and false friends](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/languages/en-x-emode/10-vocabulary/) (sense table for *so*, *such*) and [29. Ellipsis, word order and information structure](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/languages/en/29-ellipsis-word-order-information-structure/) (covert elements). The code is `en/src/emode.rs` (closed table of Early Modern forms) and `en/src/dict.rs`. The measure: sense-label accuracy on the test sentences above. Run it twice and check that the output is identical. ## Cite The paper itself, not this card. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. [DOI 10.16995/glossa.5755](https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.5755) ``` @article{beck2023old, title = {{On Old English swa 'so'}}, author = {Beck, Sigrid}, journal = {Glossa: a journal of general linguistics}, year = {2023}, doi = {10.16995/glossa.5755}, url = {https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.5755} } ``` - [← previous Noun phrases in early Germanic languages](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/bech-2024-noun-phrases-early-germanic/) - [next → STARC: Structured Annotations for Reading Comprehension](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/berzak-2020-starc-structured-annotations-reading-comprehension/) - [↑ back to English](https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/en/) ## References 51 references, 0 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet. 1. Axel-Tober, Katrin. 2012. (Nicht-)kanonische Nebensätze im Deutschen; Synchrone und diachrone Aspekte [(Non-)canonical subordinate clauses in German; synchronic and diachronic aspects] (Linguistische Arbeiten 542). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110276671 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110276671) 2. Beck, Sigrid. 1996. Wh-Constructions and transparent Logical Form. PhD dissertation, Universität Tübingen. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Beck%2C+Sigrid%2E+1996%2E+Wh%2DConstructions+and+transparent+Logical+Form%2E+PhD+dissertation%2C+Universit%C3%A4t+T%C3%BCbingen%2E) 3. Beck, Sigrid. 2011. Comparison constructions. In Maienborn, Claudia & von Heusinger, Klaus & Portner, Paul (eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, 1341– 1389. Mouton: De Gruyter. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Beck%2C+Sigrid%2E+2011%2E+Comparison+constructions%2E+In+Maienborn%2C+Claudia+%26+von+Heusinger%2C+Klaus+%26+Portner%2C+Paul+%28eds%2E%29%2C+Semantics%3A+An+International+Handbook+of+Natural+Language+Meaning%2C+1341%E2%80%93+1389%2E+Mouton%3A) 4. Beck, Sigrid. 2012a. Pluractional comparisons. Linguistics and Philosophy 35. 57110. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1007/s10988-012-9111-3 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-012-9111-3) 5. Beck, Sigrid. 2012b. Lucinda driving too fast again—the scalar properties of ambiguous than-clauses. Journal of Semantics 30. 1–63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffr011 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffr011) 6. Beck, Sigrid & Rullmann, Hotze. 1999. A flexible approach to exhaustivity in questions. Natural Language Semantics 7(3). 249–297. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008373224343 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1008373224343) 7. Beck, Sigrid & Gergel, Remus. 2015. The diachronic semantics of English again. Natural Language Semantics 23. 157–203. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-015-9111-2 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-015-9111-2) 8. Bhatt, Rajesh & Pancheva, Roumyana. 2006. Conditionals. In Everaert, Martin & van Riemsdijk, Henk (eds.), The Blackwell companion to syntax, 638–687. Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470996591.ch16 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470996591.ch16) 9. Bosworth, Joseph & Toller, T. Northcote. 1898. An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Bosworth%2C+Joseph+%26+Toller%2C+T%2E+Northcote%2E+1898%2E+An+Anglo%2DSaxon+Dictionary%2E) 10. Bosworth, Joseph & Toller, T. Northcote. 1921. Supplement. Available at https://bosworthtoller.com/ Champollion, Lucas & Krifka, Manfred. 2016. Mereology. In Aloni, Maria (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Formal Semantics, 513–541. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139236157.014 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139236157.014) 11. Chierchia, Gennaro & Fox, Danny & Spector, Benjamin. 2011. The grammatical view of scalar implicatures and the relationship between semantics and pragmatics. In Maienborn, Claudia & Portner, Paul & von Heusinger, Klaus (eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, Vol 3, 2297–2332. Berlin: De Gruyter. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Chierchia%2C+Gennaro+%26+Fox%2C+Danny+%26+Spector%2C+Benjamin%2E+2011%2E+The+grammatical+view+of+scalar+implicatures+and+the+relationship+between+semantics+and+pragmatics%2E+In+Maienborn%2C+Claudia+%26+Portner%2C+Paul+%26+vo) 12. Demirok, Ömer. 2017. A compositional semantics for Turkish correlatives. Proceedings of West Coast Conference in Formal Linguistics WCCFL. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Demirok%2C+%C3%96mer%2E+2017%2E+A+compositional+semantics+for+Turkish+correlatives%2E+Proceedings+of+West+Coast+Conference+in+Formal+Linguistics+WCCFL%2E) 13. Elbourne, Paul. 2013. Definite descriptions. Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ acprof:oso/9780199660193.001.0001 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1093/) 14. Fischer, Olga & van Kemenade, Ans & Koopman, Willem & van der Wurff, Wim. 2000. The syntax of early English. Cambridge: CUP. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511612312 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511612312) 15. Fox, Danny. 2007. Free choice and the theory of scalar implicatures. In Sauerland, Uli & Stateva, Penka (eds.), Presupposition and implicature in compositional semantics, 71–120. Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230210752_4 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230210752_4) 16. Fox, Danny & Hackl, Martin. 2007. On the universal density of measurement. Linguistics & Philosophy 29:537–586. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-006-9004-4 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-006-9004-4) 17. Hamblin, Charles. 1973. Questions in Montague Grammar. Foundations of Language 10. 41–53. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Hamblin%2C+Charles%2E+1973%2E+Questions+in+Montague+Grammar%2E+Foundations+of+Language+10%2E+41%E2%80%9353%2E) 18. Heim, Irene. 1994. Interrogative complements of Know. In Buchalla, Rhonna & Mittwoch, Anita (eds.): Proceedings of the 9th Annual IATL conference and the 1993 IATL Workshop on discourse, 128–144. Akademon, Jerusalem. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Heim%2C+Irene%2E+1994%2E+Interrogative+complements+of+Know%2E+In+Buchalla%2C+Rhonna+%26+Mittwoch%2C+Anita+%28eds%2E%29%3A+Proceedings+of+the+9th+Annual+IATL+conference+and+the+1993+IATL+Workshop+on+discourse%2C+128%E2%80%93144%2E+Akad) 19. Heim, Irene. 1990. E-type pronouns and donkey anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy 13. 137– 177. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00630732 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00630732) 20. Heim, Irene & Kratzer, Angelika. 1998. Semantics in generative grammar. Blackwell. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Heim%2C+Irene+%26+Kratzer%2C+Angelika%2E+1998%2E+Semantics+in+generative+grammar%2E+Blackwell%2E) 21. Hirsch, Aron. 2015. A compositional semantics for wh-ever free relatives. In Bade, Nadine & Berezovskaya, Polina & Schöller, Anthea (eds.), Proceedings of Sinn & Bedeutung 20. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Hirsch%2C+Aron%2E+2015%2E+A+compositional+semantics+for+wh%2Dever+free+relatives%2E+In+Bade%2C+Nadine+%26+Berezovskaya%2C+Polina+%26+Sch%C3%B6ller%2C+Anthea+%28eds%2E%29%2C+Proceedings+of+Sinn+%26+Bedeutung+20%2E) 22. Hohaus, Vera & Tiemann, Sonja & Beck, Sigrid. 2015. Acquisition of comparison constructions. Language Acquisition 21. 215–249. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2014.892914 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2014.892914) 23. Hohaus, Vera & Zimmermann, Malte. 2021. Comparisons of equality with German so…wie, and the relationship between degrees and properties. Journal of Semantics 38. 95–143. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffaa011 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffaa011) 24. Jacobson, Pauline. 1995. On the quantificational force of English free relatives. In Back, Emmon & Jelinek, Eloise & Kratzer, Angelika & Partee, Barbara (eds.), Quantification in Natural Languages. Kluwer. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-0321-3_15) 25. Klein, Ewan. 1991. Comparatives. In von Stechow, Arnim & Wunderlich, Dieter (eds.), Semantics. An international handbook on contemporary research, 673–691. Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1515/9783110126969.8.673 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110126969.8.673) 26. Kleindinst, Nathan. 2007. Plurality and possibility. PhD dissertation, UCLA. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Kleindinst%2C+Nathan%2E+2007%2E+Plurality+and+possibility%2E+PhD+dissertation%2C+UCLA%2E) 27. König, Ekkehard & Vezzosi, Letizia. 2022. On the development of OE ‘swa’ to ModE ‘so’ and related changes in an atypical group of deomstratives. In Los, Bettelou & Cowie, Claire & Honeybone, Patrick & Truesdale, Graeme (eds.), English Historical Linguistics: Change in Structure and Meaning. Papers from the XXth ICEHL [Current issues in Linguistic Theory 358], 309–344. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.358.13kon [↗](https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.358.13kon) 28. Kratzer, Angelika. 1991. Modality. In von Stechow, Arnim & Wunderlich, Dieter (eds.), Semantics. An international handbook on contemporary research, 639–650. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1515/9783110126969.7.639 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110126969.7.639) 29. Lipták, Anikó. 2009. Correlatives cross-linguistically. John Benjamins Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.1 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.1) 30. Meier, Cecile. 2000. Konsekutive Konstruktionen und relative Modalität [Consecutive constructions and relative modality]. PhD Dissertation, Universität Tübingen. Avalaible at https:// publikationen.uni-tuebingen.de/xmlui/bitstream/handle/10900/46150/pdf/meierdiss. pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Meier, Cecile. 2003. The Meaning of ‘too’, ‘enough’ and ‘so that’. Natural Language Semantics 11. 69–107. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023002608785 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1023002608785) 31. Mitrovic, Moreno & Sauerland, Uli. 2014. Decomposing coordination. Proceedings of NELS 44. 39–52. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Mitrovic%2C+Moreno+%26+Sauerland%2C+Uli%2E+2014%2E+Decomposing+coordination%2E+Proceedings+of+NELS+44%2E+39%E2%80%9352%2E) 32. Mitrovic, Moreno & Sauerland, Uli. 2016. Two conjunctions are better than one. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 63. 471–494. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1556/064.2016.63.4.5 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1556/064.2016.63.4.5) 33. Partee, Barbara. 1986. Noun phrase interpretation and type-shifting principles. In Groenendijk, Jeroen & de Jongh, Dick & Stokhof, Martin (eds.), Studies in Discourse Representation Theory and the Theory of Generalized Quantifiers, 115–143. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783112420027-006 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1515/9783112420027-006) 34. Patel-Grosz, Pritty & Grosz, Patrick. 2017. Revisiting pronominal typology. Linguistic Inquiry 48. 259–297. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00243 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00243) 35. Penka, Doris. 2021. The degree proform so in German. Ms. Universität Konstanz. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Penka%2C+Doris%2E+2021%2E+The+degree+proform+so+in+German%2E+Ms%2E+Universit%C3%A4t+Konstanz%2E) 36. Percus, Orin & Sauerland, Uli. 2003a. On the LFs of attitude reports. Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 7. 228–242. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Percus%2C+Orin+%26+Sauerland%2C+Uli%2E+2003a%2E+On+the+LFs+of+attitude+reports%2E+Proceedings+of+Sinn+und+Bedeutung+7%2E+228%E2%80%93242%2E) 37. Percus, Orin & Sauerland, Uli. 2003b. Pronoun movement in dream reports. Proceedings of NELS 33. 265–283. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Percus%2C+Orin+%26+Sauerland%2C+Uli%2E+2003b%2E+Pronoun+movement+in+dream+reports%2E+Proceedings+of+NELS+33%2E+265%E2%80%93283%2E) 38. Rawlins, Kyle. 2013. (Un)conditionals. Natural Language Semantics 40. 111–178. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1007/s11050-012-9087-0 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-012-9087-0) 39. Romero, Maribel & von Stechow, Arnim. 2009. Tense: Intro. Available under [https://ling.sprachwiss.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/romero/classes/wise0809/315/TenseIntro.pdf](https://ling.sprachwiss.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/romero/classes/wise0809/315/TenseIntro.pdf) (accessed 4. [↗](https://ling.sprachwiss.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/romero/classes/wise0809/315/TenseIntro.pdf) 40. Slade, Benjamin. 2011. Formal and philological inquiries into the nature of interrogatives, indefinites, disjunction, and focus in Sinhala and other languages. PhD dissertation. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, IL. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Slade%2C+Benjamin%2E+2011%2E+Formal+and+philological+inquiries+into+the+nature+of+interrogatives%2C+indefinites%2C+disjunction%2C+and+focus+in+Sinhala+and+other+languages%2E+PhD+dissertation%2E+University+of+Illinois) 41. Schlenker, Philippe. 2004. Conditionals as definite descriptions (a referential analysis). In Kempson, Ruth & von Heusinger, Klaus (eds), Research on language and computation, Special Issue on Choice functions in semantics, 417–462. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11168-004-0908-2 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11168-004-0908-2) 42. Sharvy, Richard. 1980. A more general theory of definite descriptions. The Philosophical Review 89. 607–624. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2184738 [↗](https://doi.org/10.2307/2184738) 43. Stalnaker, Robert. 1968. A theory of conditionals. Studies in Logical Theory, American Philosophical Quaterly, Monograph: 2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9117-0_2 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9117-0_2) 44. Taylor, Ann & Warner, Anthony & Pintzuk, Susan & Beths, Frank. 2003. The York-Toronto-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Taylor%2C+Ann+%26+Warner%2C+Anthony+%26+Pintzuk%2C+Susan+%26+Beths%2C+Frank%2E+2003%2E+The+York%2DToronto%2DHelsinki+Parsed+Corpus+of+Old+English+Prose%2E) 45. Truswell, Robert & Gisborne, Nikolas. 2015. Quantificational variability and the genesis of English headed wh-relatives. In Csipak, Eva & Zeijlstra, Hedde (eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 19, 639–656. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Truswell%2C+Robert+%26+Gisborne%2C+Nikolas%2E+2015%2E+Quantificational+variability+and+the+genesis+of+English+headed+wh%2Drelatives%2E+In+Csipak%2C+Eva+%26+Zeijlstra%2C+Hedde+%28eds%2E%29%2C+Proceedings+of+Sinn+und+Bedeutung+19%2C) 46. Umbach, Carla. 2007. The role of so in German equative comparison. Talk given at CSSP 2007. Available at [http://www.cssp.cnrs.fr/cssp2007/abstracts/umbach.pdf](http://www.cssp.cnrs.fr/cssp2007/abstracts/umbach.pdf) (accessed 5.8.2021). [↗](http://www.cssp.cnrs.fr/cssp2007/abstracts/umbach.pdf) 47. Umbach, Carla & Gust, Helmar. 2014. Similarity demonstratives. Lingua 149. 74–93. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.05.003 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.05.003) 48. Umbach, Carla & Gust, Helmar. 2020. Grading similarity. Available at [http://www.carla-umbach.de/publications/Umbach&Gust%20Grading%20Similarity.draft%20May2019.pdf](http://www.carla-umbach.de/publications/Umbach&Gust%20Grading%20Similarity.draft%20May2019.pdf) (accessed 8.12.20). [↗](http://www.carla-umbach.de/publications/Umbach&Gust%20Grading%20Similarity.draft%20May2019.pdf) 49. von Fintel, Kai & Matthewson, Lisa. 2008. Universals in semantics. The Linguistic Review 25(1–2). 139–201. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/TLIR.2008.004 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1515/tlir.2008.004) 50. von Fintel, Kai & Fox, Danny & Iatridou, Sabine. 2014. Definiteness as maximal informativeness. In Crnic, Luka & Sauerland, Uli (eds.), The art and craft of semantics: A Festschrift for Irene Heim. MITWPL 70, vol. 1, 165–174. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=von+Fintel%2C+Kai+%26+Fox%2C+Danny+%26+Iatridou%2C+Sabine%2E+2014%2E+Definiteness+as+maximal+informativeness%2E+In+Crnic%2C+Luka+%26+Sauerland%2C+Uli+%28eds%2E%29%2C+The+art+and+craft+of+semantics%3A+A+Festschrift+for+Irene+Heim%2E+MI) 51. von Stechow, Arnim. 1984. Comparing semantic theories of comparison. Journal of Semantics 3. 1–77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/3.1-2.1 [↗](https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/3.1-2.1)