(2) The attributive genitive, whatever relationship it expresses, usually precedes the noun which it qualifies: Breoton is gārsecges īgland, Britain is an island of the ocean (literally, ocean’s island); Swilce hit is ēac berende on węcga ōrum, Likewise it is also rich in ores of metals (literally, metals’ ores); Cyninga cyning, King of kings (literally, Kings’ king); Gē witon Godes rīces gerȳne, Ye know the mystery of the kingdom of God (literally, Ye know God’s kingdom’s mystery).
A preposition governing the word modified by the genitive, precedes the genitive:[2] On ealdra manna sægenum, In old men’s sayings; Æt ðǣra strǣta ęndum, At the ends of the streets (literally, At the streets’ ends); For ealra ðīnra hālgena lufan, For all thy saints’ love. See, also, [§ 94, (5)].
[1.] But in the Voyages of Ohthere and Wulfstan, in which the style is apparently more that of oral than of written discourse, the Normal is more frequent than the Transposed order in dependent clauses. In his other writings Alfred manifests a partiality for the Transposed order in dependent clauses, except in the case of substantival clauses introduced by þæt. Such clauses show a marked tendency to revert to their Normal oratio recta order. The norm thus set by the indirect affirmative clause seems to have proved an important factor in the ultimate disappearance of Transposition from dependent clauses. The influence of Norman French helped only to consummate forces that were already busily at work.
[2.] The positions of the genitive are various. It frequently follows its noun: þā bearn þāra Aðeniensa, The children of the Athenians. It may separate an adjective and a noun: Ān lȳtel sǣs earm, A little arm of (the) sea. The genitive may here be construed as an adjective, or part of a compound = A little sea-arm; Mid mǫnegum Godes gifum, With many God-gifts = many divine gifts.
[ CHAPTER V.]
Practical Suggestions.
[22.]
In the study of Old English, the student must remember that he is dealing not with a foreign or isolated language but with the earlier forms of his own mother tongue. The study will prove profitable and stimulating in proportion as close and constant comparison is made of the old with the new. The guiding principles in such a comparison are reducible chiefly to two. These are (1) the regular operation of phonetic laws, resulting especially in certain Vowel Shiftings, and (2) the alterations in form and syntax that are produced by Analogy.
(1) “The former of these is of physiological or natural origin, and is perfectly and inflexibly regular throughout the same period of the same language; and even though different languages show different phonetic habits and predilections, there is a strong general resemblance between the changes induced in one language and in another; many of the particular laws are true for many languages.
(2) “The other principle is psychical, or mental, or artificial, introducing various more or less capricious changes that are supposed to be emendations; and its operation is, to some extent, uncertain and fitful.”[1]