A Brief History of the English Language and Literature Part 5

(_a_) The guttural has been softened, through Norman-French influence, into a +sibilant+. Thus +rigg+, +egg+, and +brigg+ have become +ridge+, +edge+, and +bridge+.

(_b_) The guttural has become a +l.a.b.i.al+-- +f+-- as in +cough+, +enough+, +trough+, +laugh+, +draught+, etc.

(_c_) The guttural has become an additional syllable, and is represented by a +vowel-sound+. Thus +sorg+ and +mearh+ have become +sorrow+ and +marrow+.

(_d_) In some words it has disappeared both to eye and ear. Thus +maked+ has become +made+.

14. +The Story of the GH.+-- How is it, then, that we have in so many words the two strongest gutturals in the language-- +g+ and +h+-- not only separately, in so many of our words, but combined? The story is an odd one. Our Old English or Saxon scribes wrote-- not +light+, +might+, and +night+, but +liht+, +miht+, and +niht+. When, however, they found that the Norman-French gentlemen would not sound the +h+, and say-- as is still said in Scotland-- _li+ch+t_, &c., they redoubled the guttural, strengthened the +h+ with a hard +g+, and again presented the dose to the Norman. But, if the Norman could not sound the +h+ alone, still less could he sound the double guttural; and he very coolly let both alone-- ignored both. The Saxon scribe doubled the signs for his guttural, just as a farmer might put up a strong wooden fence in front of a hedge; but the Norman cleared both with perfect ease and indifference. And so it came to pa.s.s that we have the symbol +gh+ in more than seventy of our words, and that in most of these we do not sound it at all. The +gh+ remains in our language, like a moss-grown boulder, brought down into the fertile valley in a glacial period, when gutturals were both spoken and written, and men believed in the truthfulness of letters-- but now pa.s.sed by in silence and noticed by no one.

15. +The Letters that represent Gutturals.+-- The English guttural has been quite Protean in the written or printed forms it takes. It appears as an +i+, as a +y+, as a +w+, as a +ch+, as a +dge+, as a +j+, and-- in its more native forms-- as a +g+, a +k+, or a +gh+. The following words give all these forms: ha+i+l, da+y+, fo+w+l, tea+ch+, e+dge+, a+j+ar, dra+g+, truc+k+, and trou+gh+. Now _hail_ was _hagol_, _day_ was _daeg_, _fowl_ was _fugol_, _teach_ was _taecan_, _edge_ was _egg_, _ajar_ was _achar_. In +seek+, +beseech+, +sought+-- which are all different forms of the same word-- we see the guttural appearing in three different forms-- as a hard +k+, as a soft +ch+, as an unnoticed +gh+. In +think+ and +thought+, +drink+ and +draught+, +sly+ and +sleight+, +dry+ and +drought+, +slay+ and +slaughter+, it takes two different forms. In +dig+, +ditch+, and +dike+-- which are all the same word in different shapes-- it again takes three forms. In +fly+, +flew+, and +flight+, it appears as a +y+, a +w+, and a +gh+. But, indeed, the manners of a guttural, its ways of appearing and disappearing, are almost beyond counting.

16. +Grammatical Result of the Loss of Inflexions.+-- When we look at a Latin or French or German word, we know whether it is a verb or a noun or a preposition by its mere appearance-- by its face or by its dress, so to speak. But the loss of inflexions which has taken place in the English language has resulted in depriving us of this advantage-- if advantage it is. Instead of +looking+ at the +face+ of a word in English, we are obliged to +think+ of its +function+,-- that is, of what it does. We have, for example, a large number of words that are both nouns and verbs-- we may use them as the one or as the other; and, till we have used them, we cannot tell whether they are the one or the other.

Thus, when we speak of "a +cut+ on the finger," +cut+ is a +noun+, because it is a name; but when we say, "Harry cut his finger," then +cut+ is a +verb+, because it tells something about Harry. Words like +bud+, +cane+, +cut+, +comb+, +cap+, +dust+, +fall+, +fish+, +heap+, +mind+, +name+, +pen+, +plaster+, +punt+, +run+, +rush+, +stone+, and many others, can be used either as +nouns+ or as +verbs+. Again, +fast+, +quick+, and +hard+ may be used either as +adverbs+ or as +adjectives+; and +back+ may be employed as an +adverb+, as a +noun+, and even as an +adjective+. Shakespeare is very daring in the use of this licence. He makes one of his characters say, "But me no buts!" In this sentence, the first _but_ is a +verb+ in the imperative mood; the second is a +noun+ in the objective case. Shakespeare uses also such verbs as _to glad_, _to mad_, such phrases as _a seldom pleasure_, and _the fairest she_.

Dr Abbott says, "In Elizabethan English, almost any part of speech can be used as any other part of speech. An adverb can be used as a verb, 'they _askance_ their eyes'; as a noun, 'the _backward_ and abysm of time'; or as an adjective, 'a seldom pleasure.' Any noun, adjective, or neuter verb can be used as an active verb. You can 'happy' your friend, 'malice' or 'fool' your enemy, or 'fall' an axe upon his neck." Even in modern English, almost any noun can be used as a verb. Thus we can say, "to _paper_ a room"; "to _water_ the horses"; "to _black-ball_ a candidate"; to "_iron_ a shirt" or "a prisoner"; "to _toe_ the line." On the other hand, verbs may be used as nouns; for we can speak of a _work_, of a beautiful _print_, of a long _walk_, and so on.

CHAPTER IV.

SPECIMENS OF ENGLISH OF DIFFERENT PERIODS.

1. +Vocabulary and Grammar.+-- The oldest English or Anglo-Saxon differs from modern English both in vocabulary and in grammar-- in the words it uses and in the inflexions it employs. The difference is often startling. And yet, if we look closely at the words and their dress, we shall most often find that the words which look so strange are the very words with which we are most familiar-- words that we are in the habit of using every day; and that it is their dress alone that is strange and antiquated. The effect is the same as if we were to dress a modern man in the clothes worn a thousand years ago: the chances are that we should not be able to recognise even our dearest friend.

2. +A Specimen from Anglo-Saxon.+-- Let us take as an example a verse from the Anglo-Saxon version of one of the Gospels. The well-known verse, Luke ii. 40, runs thus in our oldest English version:--

Solice aet cild weox, and waes gestranG.o.d, wisdomes full; and G.o.des gyfu waes on him.

Now this looks like an extract from a foreign language; but it is not: it is our own veritable mother-tongue. Every word is pure ordinary English; it is the dress-- the spelling and the inflexions-- that is quaint and old-fashioned. This will be plain from a literal translation:--

Soothly that child waxed, and was strengthened, wisdoms full (= full of wisdom); and G.o.d's gift was on him.

3. +A Comparison.+-- This will become plainer if we compare the English of the Gospels as it was written in different periods of our language.

The alteration in the meanings of words, the changes in the application of them, the variation in the use of phrases, the falling away of the inflexions-- all these things become plain to the eye and to the mind as soon as we thoughtfully compare the different versions. The following are extracts from the Anglo-Saxon version (995), the version of Wycliffe (1389) and of Tyndale (1526), of the pa.s.sage in Luke ii. 44, 45:--

ANGLO-SAXON.

WYCLIFFE.

TYNDALE.

Wendon aet he on heora gefere waere, a comon hig anes daeges faer, and hine sohton betweox his magas and his cuan.

Forsothe thei gessinge him to be in the felowschipe, camen the wey of a day, and sou?ten him among his cosyns and knowen.

For they supposed he had bene in the company, they cam a days iorney, and sought hym amonge their kynsfolke and acquayntaunce.

a hig hyne ne fundon, hig gewendon to Hierusalem, hine secende.

And thei not fyndinge, wenten a?en to Jerusalem, sekynge him.

And founde hym not, they went backe agayne to Hierusalem, and sought hym.

The literal translation of the Anglo-Saxon version is as follows:--

(They) weened that he on their companionship were (= was), when came they one day's faring, and him sought betwixt his relations and his couth (folk = acquaintances).

When they him not found, they turned to Jerusalem, him seeking.

4. +The Lord's Prayer.+-- The same plan of comparison may be applied to the different versions of the Lord's Prayer that have come down to us; and it will be seen from this comparison that the greatest changes have taken place in the grammar, and especially in that part of the grammar which contains the inflexions.

THE LORD'S PRAYER.

+1130.+ REIGN OF STEPHEN.

+1250.+ REIGN OF HENRY III.

+1380.+ WYCLIFFE'S VERSION.

+1526.+ TYNDALE'S VERSION.

Fader ure, e art on heofone.

Fadir ur, that es in hevene, Our Fadir, that art in hevenys, Our Father which art in heaven;

Sy gebletsod name in, Halud thi nam to nevene; Halewid be thi name; Halowed be thy name;

c.u.me in rike.

Thou do as thi rich rike; Thi kingdom come to; Let thy kingdom come;

Si in wil swa swa on heofone and on eoran.

Thi will on erd be wrought, eek as it is wrought in heven ay.

Be thi wil done in erthe, as in hevene.

Thy will be fulfilled as well in earth as it is in heven.

Breod ure degwamlich geof us to daeg.

Ur ilk day brede give us to day.

Give to us this day oure breed ovir othir _substaunce_, Geve us this day ur dayly bred,

And forgeof us ageltes ura swa swa we forgeofen agiltendum urum.

Forgive thou all us dettes urs, als we forgive till ur detturs.

And forgive to us our _dettis_, as we forgiven to oure _dettouris_.

And forgeve us oure dettes as we forgeve ur detters.

And ne led us on costunge.

And ledde us in na fandung.

And lede us not into _temptacioun_; And leade us not into temptation,

Ac alys us fram yfele. Swa beo hit.

But sculd us fra ivel thing. Amen.

But _delyvere_ us from yvel. Amen.

But delyver us from evyll. For thyne is the kyngdom, and the power, and the glorye, for ever. Amen.