In this article we present the precise positions of XP and the finite verb moving to the functional categories in the Old English (OE) main clauses in association with the label algorithm advocated in Chomsky 2013. With V2 and V3 phenomena in Old English the previous studies did not show any consistent accounts on the moved positions of XP and the finite verb mingled with the status of OE pronouns in the main clauses. In the previous studies some proposed IP-V2 and others did CP-V2 in conjunction with the different status (clitic, weak pronoun or Agr clitic) of the OE Pronouns. In contrast we show a consistent account that XP moves to CP Spec and the finite verb moves to C in the OE V2 contexts including wh-clauses whereas XP moves to IP in the V3 clauses due to the label algorithm where the ϕ-feature of C and T makes two lexical items share prominent features in order to complete the labeling of CP and TP respectively.

It is argued in this article that the crucial aspects of syntactic change in the history of English are derived from the fact assumption that the LCA is applied to lexical items individually in the [CP-VP] clause structure of Old English, yielding various patterns of AUX, V and O placement. In the meantime the LCA is applied directly to the clause structure [CP-TP-vP-VP] of Modern English, thus deriving the fixed word order. With the assumption that Old English AUX and V are base-generated in the same position of VP under the [CP-VP] structure, one of both should move out of VP in order to asymmetically c-command each other due to the LCA requirements, deriving AUX-V order or V-AUX order in the surface subordinate clauses of Old English. After the introduction of TP and vP in Middle English, however, it is argued that AUX and V are base-generated in TP and vP respectively, showing the structure where TP asymmetically c-commands vP. Thus the word order change in the history of English is shown to be derived from the LCA availability.

This work aims to propose synchronic head-initial solutions for the two major puzzles of Old English pre-modal constructions, that is, the coexistence of lexical and modal interpretation and complicated ordering patterns. Concerning the dual nature of pre-modal verbs, it is argued that lexical- and modal-type pre-modal verbs have different thematic structures. A lexical-type pre-modal verb constitutes a two-place predicate and selects an external argument controlling the empty pronominal subject of an infinitival clausal complement. A modal-type pre-modal verb, on the other hand, lacks its own external argument and allows the subject of an infinitival clausal complement to undergo movement into a specifier of a higher T. Diverse ordering patterns of pre-modal verb complexes result from leftward operations. An infinitival main verb moves onto a complex of a finite pre-modal verb and a light verb v, as long as the operation is required for a verbal affixation. The complement of an infinitival main verb undergoes raising implemented by the EPP features of a light verb v. The head-initial analysis also provides an appropriate explanation for Old English causative and perception verbs with an infinitival complement.

Hyo Chang Hong. 2001. Referring Expressions of Late Old English: Discourse Functional Analysis of Apollonius of Tyre. Studies in Modern Grammar 25, 55-73. Old English referring expressions have mostly been dealt with in their sentence-internal grammatical functions. In this paper, I claim that, in addition to their case-marking functions, these referring expressions also played an important discourse-functional role in the development of Late Old English narratives. In particular, it is shown that Old English determiners sum and an, in conjunction with zero article, were major factors that determined the relative importance of the entities introduced by them.

Sang Woo Han. 2001. An SIOV Hypothesis for Old English. Studies in Modern Grammar 24, 161-177. Both the single SOVI hypothesis and double-underlying structure hypothesis do not explain various syntactic patterns of Old English. However, we can be derived them from SIOV underlying structure using the optional verb movement rule. By assuming I-initial hypothesis, we don`t need to assume the NP raising rule any more. Therefore, it can be said that this SIOV underlying structure hypothesis is a more economical and desirable hypothesis than the SOVI hypothesis and double-underlying structure hypothesis because it needs just one movement in explaining various word order types which can be found in Old English manuscripts. In spite of its merit, however, the SIOV hypothesis seems to have a critical problem. When INFL is in medial position, the verb has to move to INFL, and the surface order derived from the SIOV underlying structure would not be SOV but SVO order. It contrasts with the predominating theory that Old English is an SOV language. It is very difficult to explain all the syntactic structures with current theoretical methods. As a conclusion, it could be said that it would be more desirable to study syntactic patterns of Old English by analysing Old English manuscripts than by using current theories.

Han, Sang Woo. 1999. How to Approach Old English Syntactic Structure. Studies in Modern Grammar 17, 179-190. The aim of this paper is to show (a) that both the SOVI hypothesis and the double underlying structure hypothesis have some problems in the explanation of Old English syntactic structure, and (b) that in studying Old English syntactic structure, we must put our eyes on existing Old English manuscripts more than before. Old English was a language in the mist of a change from SOV to SVO word order. Therefore, we cannot approach Old English with current synchronic linguistic theories only. Finally I would like to emphasize the importance of studying Old English manuscripts in advance to modern linguistic theory, and propose a SIOV underlying structure with a leftward verb- movement rule to explain various types of Old English word orders.

Park, Sang-soo. 1996. The Effect of Formal Features on the Word Order Change in the History of English. Studies in Modern Grammatical Theories 9: 27-55. According to the descriptive study of texts of OE, the underlying word order of Late OE should be analyzed as a double base hypothesis. We therefore propose that the functional category of IP had both I-final SOVI and I-initial SIOV and the lexical category of VP had head-initial OV in the OE underlying structure. In the Minimalist Program the operation Attract-F is driven by the morphological considerations: the requirement that some formal features must be attracted to the functional category and checked off before Spell-out. We can explain the verb-seconding and the topicalization of OE main clauses using the operation Attract-F. The strong features of [+finite] and [+topicJ appear in the C of CP and attract the morphological features of lexical category to check the verb-seconding in the C and the topicalization in the Spec of CP. The change of underlying word order from SOVI and SIOV of OE to SIVO of ME was triggered by the inflections which were rich and full in the OE period but became reduced and levelled in the ME period The levelled inflections of ME provided the morpho-syntactic motivation for the reanalysis of underlying word order that caused the [+finite] feature in C to incorporate into the (+tense] feature in I and made the verb-seconding and the cliticization disappear in the ME period.

Lee Pil-Hwan. 1996. An Article on the Positions of Old and Middle English Particles. Studies in Modern Grammatical Theories 9: 1-25. In this article I account for the various positions of Old and Middle English particles in terms of verb second movement and extraposition. The base order of Old English is generally believed to be SOV, so a particle appears before the verb at the base. But a particle may be separated from the verb, when the verb moves to COMP by verb second movement or when the particle itself is extraposed over the verb. I argue that a particle can move to the right of the verb. However, there is no restriction on the landing site to which a particle is moved, contrary to Kemenade`s(1987) assumption that an Old English particle can move to the immediate right of the verb, or to the right of one further NP object only. This explanation is also contradictory to Pintzuk`s(1991, 1992, 1993) assumption that a particle does not move at all in Old English. An Old English particle is moved over the verb not by a construction-specific particle movement, which optionally permutes the particle with one object but by extraposition. For that reason, there may appear various elements between the verb and the extraposed particle.