They came to a place on the road; there stood a temple.

There lived in the convent a certain monk; was called Martin:

he said…

(S.O Andrew, Syntax and Style in Old English (Cambridge, UK, 1940), p.87.)

There are clear differences in our modern perceptions of Old English written in this paratactic style and OE written with many embedded clauses. The problem is in determining whether a particular clause is independent or subordinate, because the words that do the subordinating are often ambiguous. Thus, OE þā at the beginning of a clause can be either an adverb translated ‘then’ and introducing a dependant clause. Similarly, þær can be translated as ‘there’ or ‘where’, þonne as ‘then’ or ‘when’, swā as ‘so’ or ‘as’, ær as ‘formerly’ or ‘ere’, sian as ‘afterward’ or ‘since’, nū as ‘now’ or ‘now that’, þēah as ‘nevertheless’ or ‘though’, and forām as ‘therefore’ or ‘because’. In each pair the first word is an adverb, and the style that results from choosing it is a choppier style with shorter sentences, whereas the choice of the second word, a conjunction, results in longer sentences with more embedded clauses. Current research in OE syntax aims to understand the use of these ambiguous subordinators and adverbs. The conclusions that emerge will affect our modern perception of the sophistication of OE writing in verse and prose. Earlier editors tended to read a high degree of parataxis in OE and to punctuate their editions accordingly. This reading fitted in with the idea that English subordinating conjunctions had their origin in adverbs. However, one can accept the adverbial origin of conjunctions and still argue, as Andrew did in 1940, that OE style had attained a high degree of subordination (although Andrew’s conclusion now seem extreme). Furthermore, it is important to bear in mind that parataxis and hypotaxis are stylistic options and not syntactic necessities, because OE clearly had the means for a highly subordinated style. Syntactic investigators now find generally more hypotaxis than earlier editors did, but the efforts are directed towards discovering specific structural cues before making generalizations. The most obvious cues are in word order of the clause as a whole, which includes familiar historical patterns of subject and verb such as S…V, and SV. These patterns have been intensively analyzed for the principles operating in the placement of the finite verb, which typically occurs in second position in main clauses, and in final position in subordinate clauses. In addition, there are more subtle cues in the patterning of auxiliaries, contractions, and other structures. Finally it may be anachronistic to impose modern categories that result from our translations into words such as ‘then’ and ‘when’, implying that the choice was simply between a subordinate clause and an independent clause in the modern sense of the words. We should be especially cautious about imposing modern notions that equate hypotaxis with sophistication and parataxis with primitiveness until we know more about the full range of syntactic possibilities in OE.