There exists something similar to Icelandic quirky subjects in Old English
(OE) and Middle English (ME). Examples in (11) represent the quirky subject
phenomena in OE.
(11) a. licade us efencuman
liked us.DAT come
‘it pleased us to come’ (Ælfred, Bede, 4.5.276.12; Visser (1963: I 28))
b. Me hingrode.
me.DAT hungered
‘I was hungry’ (Mt 25.35, WSCp)
c. and him sy geþancod
and him.DAT be thanked
‘and may he be thanked’ (LS 14(Margaret Ass 15) 255; Allen (1995:
353))
It is w ell known that these lead to nominative subject constructions in Present-
Day English (PDE) through the process from impersonal constructions to
personal constructions.^12 Although both quirky subjects in Icelandic and OE
seem to be the same, an example from German as shown in (12) casts doubt
on their similarity.
(12) Mir wurde geholfen.
me.DAT was helped
‘I was helped (by somebody).’ (Sigurðsson (2004: 143))
The dative (mir) in (12) is proved to not be a subject on the basis of several
syntactic properties by Sigurðsson (2004) among othe rs. (13) is a syntactic test
based on Conjunction Reduction. It shows that a non-nominative subject core-
ferential with a preceding nominative subject is acceptable as the missing argu-
ment in a conjunction in Icelandic, as illustrated in (13a), whereas they are
inacceptable in German as seen in (13b).
(13) a. Icelandic
Ég hafði mikið að gera og (mér) var samt ekki hjálpað
I.NOM had much to do and (me.DAT) was nonetheless not helped
‘I had a lot to do and (I) was nonetheless not helped.’
b. German
Ich hatte viel zu tun, und *(mir) wurde trotzdem nicht geholfen
I.NOM had much to do and (me.DAT) was nonetheless not helped
(Sigurðsson (2004: 144))
Though it is impossible to carry out a syntactic test in OE and ME, Allen
(1995) offers some valua ble observations as to the subjecthood. (14) is an ME
counterpart of Icelandic quirky subjects.
Two aspects of syntactic evolution 203