Current topics in English historical linguistics: Proceedings of the Second International Conference ... held at Odense University, 13-15 April, 1981 Ed. by Michael Davenport et al. (review)

BOOK NOTICES 211 'give', past gaf) should be represented at the lowest level of contrasting features, which under her analysis would be secondary to the higher one of fortis vs. lenis. This claim is lent further support when we reahze that Gothic and Old Norse IbI have an aUophonic variation of [b:ß], an alternation of occlusion. Moulton's system would therefore make occlusion both a morphophonemic alternation (IbI:IiI) and an allophonic one ([b : ß]). From a Praguean point of view, it is preferable to keep distinctive features on the same level, separating them from aUophonic ones. Occlusion could be aUophonic, with fortis/lenis being primary among obstruents , and voicing being secondary. Alexander then systematicaUy analyses the writing systems of the principal Germanic languages : Gothic, Old Norse (both early Runic and Old Icelandic), Old EngUsh, and three different Old High German documents (Tatian, Otfrid , and Notker). She argues that the writing systems, traditionally interpreted as marking voicing contrasts, could be understood as marking a tense/lax contrast. It is here that her argumentation becomes somewhat circular, in that she uses the presence ofvoiced symbols (b d g) vs. voiceless ones to argue for the tense/ lax distinction. To be fair, she also uses evidence ofgeminate speUing to argue for the same distinctions; but sometimes the argumentation seems shaky. In addition to claiming a fortis/lenis contrast in PG, Alexander argues that the distinction remained around long enough to account for the Second Germanic Sound Shift. She argues that the tense series (/p t/) were lengthened and then 'broke' to High German /pf ts/, while the new geminate voiced stops were devoiced and joined the short tense stops. Thus the High German consonant shift was caused by a fortition of tense stops, resulting in long, subsequently affricated sounds; in postvocalic position, these ultimately spirantized. Although Alexander does not seem aware of this, there is actuaUy evidence from Indo-European that Germanic could have had a tense/ lax distinction. In a number of recent pubUcations , T. Gamkrehdze, P. Hopper, and A. Bomhard (among others) have argued for a reinterpretation of IE */p b bh/ as */p p' b/ (for an excellent summary, see Bomhard, Toward Proto-Nostratic [Amsterdam: Benjamins, 1984]). This would mean that the glottalized series in PIE became A' s tense series—a not unreasonable sound change. In sum, this is an interesting book with a plausible theory, as weU as a nice summary of what is currently known of the early Germanic orthographies . It is unlikely that Alexander's strictly Praguean theoretical arguments wiU impress those who have different views of the hierarchy of features and their role in morphophonemic alternations; but aside from that, her work is likely to be useful to anyone interested in the history of Germanic. [Geoffrey S. Nathan, Southern Illinois University.] Current topics in English historical linguistics : Proceedings of the Second International Conference ... held at Odense University, 13-15 April, 1981. Ed. by Michael Davenport et al. (Odense University studies in English, 4.) Odense, Denmark: University Press, 1983. Pp. 293. [Distrib . in the US by Humanities Press; $24.00.] Fifteen papers from the 2nd ICEHL are included here; five others are not. The topics of the papers are quite varied, as is to be expected in a volume of this kind. Three deal with syntactic questions: Suzanne Romaine, 'Syntactic change as category change by re-analysis and diffusion: Some evidence from the history of EngUsh', argues that category change is one major force in syntactic change (broadening D. Lightfoot's view to include changes that he regarded as transformational), and that lexical diffusion is another. Knud S0rensen, 'The growth of cataphoric personal and possessive pronouns in EngUsh', is a largely atheoretical description of the increasing frequency of pronouns referring to following nouns in EngUsh. Leena Kahlas -Tarkka writes 'On the variation of the words meaning "every" and "each" in Old EngUsh'. Five papers deal with phonology: Roger Lass, 'Velar IxI and the history of EngUsh', claims that taking early English IxI as a 'pharyngealized velar approximant (with or without secondary alveolarization or palatalization)' can account for most of its effects on neighboring segments. Veronika Kniezsa, 'The problem of the merger of Middle EngUsh /a:/ and...