昨日の記事「#4976. 「分離不定詞」事始め」 ([2022-12-11-1]) で紹介した分離不定詞 (split_infinitive) について，Jespersen が次のような導入を与えている．本当は "split" ではないこと，20世紀前半の Jespersen の時代にあっては分離不定詞への風当たりは緩和されてきていること，用例は14世紀からみられるが増加したのは19世紀半ばからであることなどが触れられている．

   §20.4₁. The term 'split infinitive' is generally accepted for the insertion of some word or words between to and an infinitive---which thus is not really 'split', but only separated from the particle that usually comes immediately before it.
   While the phenomenon was formerly blamed by grammarians ("barbarous practice" Skeat in Ch MP 355) and rigorously persecuted in schools, it is now looked upon with more lenient eyes ("We will split infinitives sooner than be ambiguous or artificial" Fowler MEU 560), and even regarded as an improvement (Curme). It is as old as the 14th c. and is found sporadically in many writers of repute, especially after the middle of the 19th c.; examples abound in modern novels and in serious writings, not perhaps so often in newspapers, as journalists are warned against it by their editors in chief and are often under the influence of what they have learned as 'correct' at school. Curme is right in saying that it has never been characteristic of popular speech.

　分離不定詞において to と動詞原形の間に割って入る要素は，ほとんどの場合，副詞（句）だが，中英語からの初期の例については，動詞の目的語となる名詞（句）が前置され「to + 目的語 + 動詞」となるものがあったことに注意したい．この用例を Jespersen よりいくつかみてみよう．この語順は近現代ではさすがにみられない．

   §20.4₄. In ME we sometimes find an object between to and the infinitive: Ch MP 6.128 Wel lever is me lyken yow and deye Than for to any thing or thinke or seye That mighten yow offende in any tyme | Nut-Brown Maid in Specimens III. x. 180 Moche more ought they to god obey, and serue but hym alone.
   This seems never to be found in ModE, but we sometimes find an apposition to the subject inserted: Aumonier Q 194 Then they seemed to all stop suddenly.

　一口に分離不定詞といっても，英語史的にみると諸相があっておもしろそうだ．

　・ Jespersen, Otto. A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Part 5. Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1954.

[ ツイート | 固定リンク | 印刷用ページ ]