Old English (c. 4501150 AD) used a system of relative clauses that is both familiar to modern speakers and strikingly different. The following overview covers the main grammatical devices, the particles that introduce relative clauses, word order, and a few illustrative examples.
Relative clauses were most often introduced by the demonstrative pronoun se (masc.), so (fem.) or t (neut.). These forms also functioned as definite articles, demonstratives, and relative pronouns. When used relatively, they agree in gender, number and case with the noun they refer to (the antecedent), but their case is determined by the function inside the relative clause.
| Antecedent | Relative pronoun (nominative) | Relative pronoun (accusative) | Relative pronoun (dative) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Masculine singular | se | one | m |
| Feminine singular | so | re | |
| Neuter singular | t | t | m |
| Plural (all genders) | m |
Example (nominative antecedent, accusative relative pronoun):
Se cyning, e geseah, sprc me.
The king, whom you saw, spoke to me.
Two particles often appear after the relative pronoun:
Examples:
Se mann e h hyra gongcyning cme.
The man who came with his young king.
Se lmihtiga, se e r ws, lfde ho.
The Almighty, who was before, delivered her.
Old English generally maintained VerbSecond (V2) order in main clauses, but relative clauses behaved like subordinate clauses, showing VerbFinal order. The finite verb typically appears at the end of the relative clause.
Example (VerbFinal):
Se cyning, e on m brycge sitte, tode h.
The king, who sits in the bridge, ate.
When the relative pronoun would be in the accusative or dative case, Old English sometimes omitted it, especially when the antecedent was a personal pronoun. The meaning remains clear from context.
Example (omission of accusative one):
Ic geseah one mann, (who I saw)
could be shortened to:
Ic geseah one, e h ws t wste.
I saw the man, who was the worst.
Old English could stack relative clauses, each introduced by its own relative pronoun and particle. The clauses are typically separated by commas (or by a pause in speech) and each clause retains its verbfinal placement.
Se stf, e e bond ws, e t ena ws, t feore hwylc ha.
The staff, which was beyond, which that of the edge was, was far away.
When the antecedent was indefinite (e.g., sum some), Old English sometimes used a special relative particle t + e to introduce the clause.
Sum man, t h ws, seald r.
Some man, that he was, gave there.
Modern English has reduced the system to a single relative pronoun who/that/which and does not mark case on the pronoun (except for whom). Old English preserved case agreement, a richer set of demonstratives, and a clear verbfinal pattern inside the clause. Understanding these features helps students of historical linguistics see how the modern system evolved from a more inflected predecessor.
Below is an excerpt from the AngloSaxon Chronicle (c. 9thcentury) with the relative clauses highlighted.
Her r m lendum wealdend ws,se lmihtiga, e ealra lmihtig ws,se e rces gd ws,and t anweald re eoran, e mid rum hyra feorm tbd.
Translation: Here before the realms ruler was, the Almighty, who was of all almightiness, who was good to the kingdom, and the one authority of the earth, with which he fed their food.
Studying Old English relative clauses offers insight into the grammatical pathways that led to the relative constructions we use today. The interplay of inflection, particles, and word order in Old English provides a vivid illustration of the languages synthetic character.
