Internally funded project
Start date : 01.11.2016
In Old and Middle English both BE and HAVE combined with past participles of verbs to form perfect periphrases. While originally, HAVE combined with transitive verbs only (e.g. hie hæfdon hine gebundenne ‘they had bound him’) and BE with intransitive ones, the combinational range of HAVE increased already in Old English to include intransitives (e.g. Þa hie [...]gewicod hæfdon ‘when they had encamped’). Ultimately, only the HAVE-perfect survived. However, for a long time, BE+past participle remained in use with mutative intransitive verbs, i.e., verbs denoting a change of state or location (e.g. He is come, still in the 19th century).
On the basis of attestations like (1) and (2), Los (2015: 76–77) has recently suggested that there might be a systematic difference in the use of BE and HAVE with manner of motion verbs in Middle English: These can denote both a change of location, like mutative intransitives (cf. unto the temple walked is in (1)), and a ‘controlled process’ or ‘activity’, i.e., non-mutative (cf. ye han walked wyde in (2)). Los suggests that in the former use of manner of motion verbs, BE might the auxiliary of choice, in the latter HAVE.
Taking into account also other factors that have been found to influence the choice of be and have, such as counterfactuality, infinitive or past perfect context (cf., e.g., Kytö 1997), I test the above hypothesis with attestations of manner of motion verbs taken from the Corpus of Middle English Prose and Verse.