Chaucer's Works, Volume 6 — Introduction, Glossary, and Indexes
by Geoffrey Chaucer · English · Gutenberg #43097 · 1,598,318 chars · public domain (US)
The Project Gutenberg eBook of Chaucer's Works, Volume 6 — Introduction, Glossary, and Indexes
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States,
you will have to check the laws of the country where you are located
before using this eBook.
Title: Chaucer's Works, Volume 6 — Introduction, Glossary, and Indexes
Author: Geoffrey Chaucer
Editor: Walter W. Skeat
Release date: July 5, 2013 [eBook #43097]
Most recently updated: October 23, 2024
Language: English
Other information and formats: www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/43097
Credits: Produced by Jonathan Ingram, Keith Edkins and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CHAUCER'S WORKS, VOLUME 6 — INTRODUCTION, GLOSSARY, AND INDEXES ***
Transcriber's note: A few typographical errors have been corrected: they
are listed at the end of the text.
* * * * *
In this text [*e] represents the "schwa" or obscure vowel, printed as
inverted-e, and [gh] represents the Middle English letter "yogh", similar
to the numeral 3. [=a] signifies "a macron", [)a] "a breve", and so forth.
['e] signifies "e acute"; [`e] "e grave"; [:e] "e diaresis"; and so forth
(or, mostly, stress indicators resembling these accents). aesc, eth and
thorn are expanded to ae, dh and th.
* * * * *
THE COMPLETE WORKS
OF
GEOFFREY CHAUCER
_EDITED, FROM NUMEROUS MANUSCRIPTS_
BY THE
REV. WALTER W. SKEAT, M.A.
LITT.D., LL.D., D.C.L., PH.D.
ELRINGTON AND BOSWORTH PROFESSOR OF ANGLO-SAXON
AND FELLOW OF CHRIST'S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE
* * *
* * *
INTRODUCTION, GLOSSARY, AND INDEXES
'Thou shall have yit, or hit be eve,
Of every word of this sentence
A preve, by experience;
And with thyn eres heren wel
Top and tail, and everydel.'
_The Hous of Fame_, 876-880.
Oxford
AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
M DCCC XCIV
* * * * *
Oxford
PRINTED AT THE CLARENDON PRESS
BY HORACE HART, M.A.,
PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY
IN GRATEFUL MEMORY
OF
HENRY BRADSHAW
* * * * *
CONTENTS.
GENERAL INTRODUCTION.--s. 1. Objects in view in preparing this
edition. s. 2. Romaunt of the Rose. s. 3. The Minor Poems; Canon of
Chaucer's works. s. 4. A Compleint to his Lady; the Former Age;
Merciless Beautee; Balade to Rosemounde; Against Women Unconstaunt;
Complaints. s. 5. Boethius. s. 6. Troilus. s. 7. The House of Fame.
s. 8. The Legend of Good Women. s. 9. The Astrolabe. s. 10. The
Canterbury Tales. s. 11. Obligations to others. s. 12. Thomas
Tyrwhitt; Thomas Wright; Bell and others. s. 13. Prof. Child; Dr.
Ellis; Dr. Sweet; Prof. Ten Brink; and others. s. 14. The Glossarial
Index. s. 15. Aesthetic criticism. s. 16. The Dialect of Chaucer.
s. 17. Chaucer's Kenticisms. s. 18. Pronunciation. s.19. The Vowels
and Diphthongs. s. 20. The Consonants. s. 21. Accentuation. s. 22.
Explanation of phonetic symbols. s. 23. The M.E. vowels. Example of
pronunciation. s. 24. Scansion and accents. s. 25. Rimes illustrating
the Pronunciation. Open and close [=o]. Long and short open o.
s. 26. Long and short open o in the Minor Poems. s. 27. The same; in
the Legend. s. 28. The same; in the Tales. s. 29. Open and close [=o]
in Chaucer. s. 30. Open and close [=e]. s. 31. Sources of long e.
s. 32. Development of long e. s. 33. Development of close [=e]. s. 34.
Summary of the preceding results. s.35. Examples of unstable [=e].
s.36. Word-lists. s. 37. Apparent exceptions in the Tales. s. 38.
Apparent exceptions elsewhere. s. 39. Use of the above tests. s. 40.
Further examples. s. 41. Fuller word-lists; types A, B, and C,
Chaucer's rules. s. 42. Some peculiarities of rime. s. 43. Rimes
involving two words; other feminine rimes. s. 44. Permissible rimes.
Double word-forms. s. 45. Repetitions. s. 46. Prof. Lounsbury's
objections: supposed false rimes in Chaucer and Gower. s. 47.
_Feet_, accusative, and _fete_, dative; _entente_; _fore_;
_broughte_ riming with _nought_. s. 48. Further attacks upon rimes
in Chaucer and Gower. s. 49. General failure of these attacks. s. 50.
Assonances. s. 51. Non-riming of -y and -y-[:e]. s. 52. Metres and
Forms of Verse. s. 53. Lines of four accents; ballad-metre;
four-line stanza. s. 54. The eight-line stanza. s. 55. The seven-line
stanza; from Machault. s. 56. Terza Rima. s. 57. A ten-line stanza.
s. 58. Two nine-line stanzas. s. 59. Stanzas of six and five lines.
s. 60. Stanzas in Anelida. s. 61. Roundels. s.62. Chaucer as a metrist.
s.63. Balades and Terns. s. 64. The Envoy. s. 65. The Heroic Couplet.
s. 66. Grammatical Outlines. s. 67. General Rules. s. 68. The Strong
Declension of Substantives. s. 69. Archaisms. s. 70. Three Types of
Strong Substantives. s. 71. Effect of Accent. s. 72. Double forms.
s. 73. The Weak Declension. s. 74. Genitive Singular. s. 75. Dative
Singular. s. 76. Plurals. s. 77. Substantives of French origin. s. 78.
Adjectives. s. 79. Comparatives. s. 80. Superlatives. s. 81. Numerals.
s. 82. Pronouns. s. 83. Possessives. s. 84. Demonstratives. s. 85.
Interrogatives. s. 86. Relatives. s. 87. Other pronominal forms. s. 88.
Verbs. s. 89. General formulae for verbs. s. 90. Seven Conjugations
of Strong Verbs. s. 91. Formation of Weak Verbs. s. 92. Three Classes
of Weak Verbs. s. 93. Some other Verbs. s. 94. Negative forms. s. 95.
Adverbs. s. 96. Prepositions and Conjunctions. s. 97. Constructions.
s. 98. Versification. s. 99. Three Latin terms; iamb, trochee,
amphibrach. s. 100. Speech-waves. s. 101. Prose and Verse. s. 102.
Some new symbols. s. 103. Old French metres. s. 104. Sixteen forms
of lines. s. 105. Chaucer's chief licences. s. 106. Examples of
scansion. s. 107. His moveable pause. s. 108. Additional syllables
explained. s. 109. Examples of additional syllables. s. 110. Syllable
dropped in the midst of a line. s. 111. Accentuation. s. 112. Elision.
s. 113. The vowel i not counted as a syllable. s. 114. Suppression
of syllables. s. 115. Contraction. s. 116. No elision at a pause.
s. 117. Four-accent metre. s. 118. Alliteration. s. 119. Chaucer's
authorities ix
GLOSSARIAL INDEX 1
GLOSSARY TO FRAGMENTS B AND C OF THE ROMAUNT OF THE ROSE 311
GLOSSARY TO GAMELYN 347
INDEX OF PROPER NAMES 359
INDEX OF AUTHORS QUOTED OR REFERRED TO BY CHAUCER 381
INDEX OF BOOKS REFERRED TO IN THE NOTES 390
LIST OF MANUSCRIPTS 399
GENERAL LIST OF ERRATA 400
GENERAL INDEX 410
* * * * *
GENERAL INTRODUCTION
s. 1. In the very brief Introduction to vol. I., I have given a sketch of
the general contents of the present work. I here take occasion, for the
reader's information, to describe somewhat more particularly the chief
objects which I have had in view.
In the first place, my endeavour has been to produce a thoroughly sound
text, founded solely on the best MSS. and the earliest prints, which shall
satisfy at once the requirements of the student of language and the reader
who delights in poetry. In the interest of both, it is highly desirable
that Chaucer's genuine works should be kept apart from those which were
recklessly associated with them in the early editions, and even in modern
editions have been but imperfectly suppressed. It was also desirable, or
rather absolutely necessary, that the recent advances in our knowledge of
Middle-English grammar and phonetics should be rightly utilised, and that
no verbal form should be allowed to appear which would have been
unacceptable to a good scribe of the fourteenth century[1].
I have also provided a large body of illustrative notes, many of them
gathered from the works of my predecessors, but enlarged by illustrations
due to my own reading during a long course of years, and by many others due
to the labours of the most recent critics. The number of allusions that
have been traced to their origin during the last fifteen years is
considerable; and much additional light has thus been thrown upon Chaucer's
method of treating his originals. How far such investigation has been
successful, can readily be gathered from an inspection of the Index of
Authors Quoted in the present volume, in which the passages quoted by
Chaucer are collected and arranged, and an alphabetical list is given of
the authors whom he appears to have most consulted.
The Glossary has been compiled on a much larger scale than any hitherto
attempted, wherein the part of speech of almost every word is duly marked,
and every verbal form is sufficiently parsed. A special feature of the
Glossary is the exclusion from it of non-Chaucerian words and forms; and in
order to secure this result, separate Glossaries are given of the chief
words occurring in Fragments B and C of the Romaunt of the Rose and in
Gamelyn; and we are thus enabled to detect a marked difference in the
vocabulary employed in these pieces from that which was employed by
Chaucer[2]. And I cannot refrain from here expressing the hope, that the
practical usefulness of the Glossary and Indexes may predispose the critic
to forgive some errors in other parts of the work. And further, also in the
interest of every true student, much pains have been bestowed on the mode
of numbering the lines. It is not so easy a matter as it would seem to be.
Many editors give no numbering at all; and, where it is given, it is not
always correct[3]. The numbering of the Canterbury Tales, in particular,
was especially troublesome. I give three distinct systems of counting the
lines, and even thus have failed in giving the numbering of Wright's
edition beyond l. 11928, where he suddenly begins a new numbering of his
own[4].
I append a few remarks on the text of the various pieces.
s. 2. ROMAUNT OF THE ROSE. The old text is often extremely and even
ludicrously corrupt. Thanks to the patient labours of Dr. Max Kaluza, and
his restoration, by the collation of MSS., of the French original, many
emendations have been made, for several of which I am much indebted to him.
A paper (by myself) containing a summary of the principal passages which
are thus, for the first time, rendered intelligible, has lately appeared in
the Transactions of the Cambridge Philological Society, vol. iii. p. 239;
but the whole subject is treated, in an exhaustive and highly satisfactory
manner, in two works by Kaluza. The former of these is his edition of the
Romaunt, from the Glasgow MS., side by side with the French text in an
emended form, as published for the Chaucer Society; and the other work is
entitled 'Chaucer und der Rosenroman,' published at Berlin in 1893[5].
See also the valuable paper on 'The Authorship of the English Romaunt of
the Rose' by Prof. G. L. Kittredge, printed in 'Studies and Notes in
Philology and Literature,' and published by Ginn and Co., Boston, U.S.A.,
in 1892. This essay shews, in opposition to Prof. Lounsbury, that there is
no reason for attributing to Chaucer the Fragments B and C of the Romaunt.
The notes to the Romaunt of the Rose are largely my own. Some are borrowed
from the notes to Bell's edition.
s. 3. MINOR POEMS. In preparing a new edition of the Minor Poems, I have
been much assisted by the experience acquired from the publication of my
separate edition of the same in 1888. A large number of criticisms were
made by Prof. Koch, which have been carefully considered; and some of them
have been gratefully adopted.
The question of authenticity chiefly applies here. Practically, the modern
'Canon' of Chaucer's genuine works has been taken, strangely enough, from
Moxon's reprint of the Poetical Works of Geoffrey Chaucer, which bears 'by
Thomas Tyrwhitt' on the title-page, and contains twenty-five poems which
Tyrwhitt never edited, as has been fully shewn in vol. v. pp. x-xiv. This
curious production, by an anonymous editor, was really made up by
reprinting such pieces as were supposed by Tyrwhitt, in 1778, to be not
spurious. The six unauthorised pieces which it contains are The Court of
Love, The Complaint of the Black Knight, Chaucer's Dream, The Flower and
the Leaf, The Cuckoo and the Nightingale, and a Virelai. Of these, The
Complaint of the Black Knight is now known to be Lydgate's, whilst The
Court of Love, Chaucer's Dream, and the Virelai are written in language
very different from that of the fourteenth century. The Flower and the
Leaf, like The Assembly of Ladies, claims to have been written by 'a
gentlewoman,' and perhaps it was. It does not seem possible to refer it to
the fourteenth century, but rather to the middle of the fifteenth. The
oldest poem of this set is The Cuckoo and the Nightingale; but it has
already been shewn (vol. i. p. 39) that it contains several rimes that are
not like Chaucer's. In addition to these I would now also note the
extraordinary rime of _upon_ with _mon_ (for _man_) in l. 85; it is merely
a matter of common prudence to discover a similar use of _mon_ for _man_ in
Chaucer before we rashly assign to him this rather pretty poem.
Suffice it to say, that no manuscript or other evidence has ever been
produced, or is known, that connects any of the above poems with the
authorship of Chaucer; though it is a very common mistake, on the part of
such critics as have never studied the facts, to _assume_ the genuineness
of these poems, and to expect an editor to prove the contrary! Surely, it
is enough to say that the external evidence wholly fails, and that the
internal evidence points, decisively, the other way. There is no reason for
attributing poems to Chaucer on grounds which would not for a moment be
allowed in the case of any other poet.
s. 4. All the other Minor Poems in Moxon's reprint are well known to be
genuine, and are therefore included in my first volume. I add a few last
words on the poems which are also printed there, though they do not appear
in Tyrwhitt's list.
A COMPLEINT TO HIS LADY. The internal evidence in favour of this poem is so
remarkable, that I need not enlarge upon it here. In particular, it is
difficult to see how any other poet of that age could have known anything
about Dante's _terza rima_. However, the matter is fairly settled by Dr.
Furnivall's discovery of the additional final stanza, with the name of
'Chaucer' appended to it. Cf. vol. i. p. 75; and p. lx. (footnotes) below.
THE FORMER AGE. Well known to be genuine, as occurring in two MSS., both of
which give Chaucer's name.
MERCILESS BEAUTE. Discussed in vol. i. p. 80. The external evidence is,
that it is the last poem in a MS., in which it is immediately preceded by
nine of Chaucer's acknowledged pieces.
In addition to the internal evidence already given in vol. i. p. 80, I have
just discovered further evidence of great interest, as bearing upon
Chaucer's treatment of the long open and close _e_, which to Lydgate's ear
sounded sufficiently alike. In the first Roundel, all the _e_'s are close,
whereas, in the last Roundel, all the _e_'s are open (s. 38)[6]. This is a
strong point in its favour.
BALADE TO ROSEMOUNDE. The unique MS. copy appends Chaucer's name.
AGAINST WOMEN UNCONSTAUNT. Discussed in vol. i. p. 88; and in vol. v. p.
xv. We must give great weight to the connection of this poem with Machault,
from whom Chaucer certainly borrowed, though his works do not appear to
have influenced any other English author; see s. 55 below. However, this
poem is placed in the Appendix.
AN AMOROUS COMPLEINT. Likewise placed in the Appendix. I believe it to be
genuine, on the strength of the internal evidence, and its obvious
connection with Troilus and other genuine poems; see the Notes, vol. i. p.
567. All the rimes are perfect, according to Chaucer's use, though it
extends to 91 lines.
A BALADE OF COMPLEYNT. In the Appendix. The genuineness of this poem is not
insisted on. It is added rather by way of illustration of the peculiar
style of poems entitled 'Complaint,' of which Chaucer was so fond. He must
have written many which have not been preserved.
WOMANLY NOBLESSE. Printed in vol. iv. p. xxv. Attributed to Chaucer in the
unique MS. copy. A unique example of rhythm, in which Chaucer was an
experimentalist. I know of no other poem having 33 lines on only 3 rimes,
similarly arranged. Cf. vol. v. p. xvi.
COMPLAINT TO MY MORTAL FOE; and COMPLAINT TO MY LODESTERRE. These also are
added as illustrative of Complaints. But I do not say they are Chaucer's;
though they _may_ be so.
One reason for printing the Balade to Rosemounde, An Amorous Complaint, A
Balade of Compleynt, Womanly Noblesse, and the two Complaints
last-mentioned is, that they have never been printed before, and are wholly
unknown. The Balade to Rosemounde and Womanly Noblesse are certainly
genuine; and there is a high probability that An Amorous Complaint is the
same.
The piece called A Compleint to his Lady was first printed in Stowe's
edition of 1561, but without the last stanza, and was reprinted in the same
imperfect state by Chalmers. It was omitted in Moxon's reprint, which
accounts for its being usually neglected. It is strange that poems which
are certainly spurious should be much better known and more highly prized.
s. 5. BOETHIUS. It is sufficiently explained in the Preface to vol. ii.
that this piece is now printed, for the first time, with modern
punctuation, and with Chaucer's glosses in italics. This is also the first
edition with explanatory notes.
s. 6. TROILUS. The text is much improved by the use of the Campsall and
Corpus MSS., which have never been before collated for any edition, though
they are the two best. The third best MS. is that printed by Dr. Morris. It
is a sad drawback to the use of his edition that Book IV begins in the
wrong place, so that all his references to this book are wrong, and require
the addition of 28. Thus Tyrwhitt's Glossary gives the reference to 'Nettle
in, dock out,' as T. iv. 461. In Morris's edition, it is T. iv. 433.
A few notes to Troilus occur in Bell's edition. I have added to them
largely, and supplied the schemes in vol. ii. pp. 461, 467, 474, 484, 494,
which enable ready reference to be made to the corresponding passages in
Boccaccio's Filostrato.
The valuable work on 'The Language of Troilus,' by Prof. Kittredge, is of
great importance. I regret that I was unable to use it at the time when my
own text was in course of preparation.
s. 7. THE HOUSE OF FAME. Previously edited by me in 1888 among the 'Minor
Poems,' and again, separately, in 1893. Much help has been received from
the (incomplete) edition by Hans Willert (Berlin, 1888). As some
lexicographers number the lines of each book separately, this mode of
numbering is duly given, as well as a continuous one.
s. 8. THE LEGEND OF GOOD WOMEN. Previously edited by me in 1889, when I
made the curious discovery that the MSS. can be divided into two sets of
types, which may be called A and B; that type A is considerably the better;
and yet, that no MS. of type A had ever before been made the basis of an
edition! The natural result was the easy correction of many corrupt
passages, the publication of the Prologue in its earlier as well as in its
later form, and the addition of a few previously unknown lines. As regards
the Notes, the most help was obtained from the edition by Prof. Corson. The
admirable article by Bech deserves a special mention.
s. 9. A TREATISE ON THE ASTROLABE. Previously edited by me for the Early
English Text Society's Extra Series, in 1872; when I discovered that none
but inferior MSS. had ever been previously printed, and that all other
editions are, in various ways, incomplete. The only one of any worth is the
modern edition by Mr. Brae, who was an excellent astronomer; but he
unfortunately based his edition upon an 'edited' MS., written about 1555,
which is not, after all, of a good type. The extraordinary errors in the
early editions of the Astrolabe are well illustrated by Mr. Brae. For
example, the statement in Part II. s. 6. l. 8 (vol. iii. p. 194) that 'the
nadir of the sonne is thilke degree that is opposit to the degree of the
sonne, _in the seventhe signe_,' appears in most early editions as 'in the
320 signe.' But 320 signs for the zodiac is much too liberal an allowance.
My edition for the E.E.T.S. also contains an edition of Messahala's Latin
treatise, from which Chaucer derived about two-thirds of his work; see vol.
iii. p. lxx.
This Treatise is of more importance than might be supposed, owing to
Chaucer's frequent allusions to astronomical subjects. Every editor of
Chaucer should know that there are nine spheres; otherwise, he may fall (as
three editors have done) into the trap prepared by the scribe of the
Harleian MS., who gives lines 1280 and 1283 of Group F of the Canterbury
Tales in this extraordinary form:--
'And by his _thre speeres_ in his worching' ...
'That in the _fourthe speere_ considred is.'
It was a special pleasure to find that Chaucer's star Aldiran (Cant. Tales,
F 265) was one of the stars marked on the 'Rete' or web of a Parisian
astrolabe in A.D. 1223, and is described (in MS. Ii. 3. 3, in the Camb.
Univ. Library) as being 'in fronte Leonis.' See vol. v. p. 380.
Some attempts have been made to calculate the date of the Canterbury Tales
from ll. 10, 11 of the Parson's Prologue. The absurdity of such an
endeavour is patent to any one who knows enough of the old astronomy and
astrology to be aware that the 'moon's exaltation' is merely a name for a
sign of the zodiac, and has nothing whatever to do with the position of the
moon itself. Here, again, the scribe of the Harleian MS. has turned the
phrase _I mene_ into _In mena_[7], misleading many enquirers who fail to
realise that he was as careless in this passage as in the former one.
s. 10. THE CANTERBURY TALES. The great gain in this poem has been the
foundation of the text upon the basis of the Ellesmere MS., the most
satisfactory of all existing MSS. having any reference to Chaucer.
The general excellence and correctness of its spellings and readings render
it the safest on which to found rules for our guidance as to pronunciation,
syntax, and prosody. For further remarks, see the Introduction to vol. iv.
p. xvii.
Much help has been obtained from the experience gained in editing various
portions of the Tales from the same MS. in former years. The edition of the
Prologue, the Knightes Tale, and the Nonnes Preestes Tale, originally
issued by Dr. Morris, underwent a considerable amount of revision by him
and by myself conjointly; and so great was the interest which he took in
the work, and so freely were the results of our researches thrown, as it
were, into a common fund, that in many instances I am unable to say which
of us it was that suggested the illustrations given in the Notes. Dr.
Morris was justly celebrated for his acuteness in unravelling the
intricacies of the various Middle-English dialects, and for his swiftness
of perception of the right use of grammatical inflections; and he
communicated the results of his labours with unsparing generosity.
The Prioresses Tale, Sire Thopas, the Monkes Tale, the Clerkes Tale, and
the Squieres Tale were first edited by me, with Notes and a Glossary, as
far back as 1874; and the book has passed through several editions since
that date[8].
The Tale of the Man of Lawe, the Pardoneres Tale, the Second Nonnes Tale,
and the Chanouns Yemannes Tale, were first edited by me, with Notes and a
Glossary, in 1877; and have been several times revised in subsequent
editions[8].
It will now be readily understood that nearly all the notes and
illustrations that have appeared in these various books are here collected
and reproduced (with corrections where necessary); and that many others
have been added of a like kind.
Perhaps I may fairly introduce here the remark that many illustrations and
explanations which are now perfectly familiar to readers of Chaucer
originally appeared for the first time in these smaller editions. Thus, to
mention a matter of no great importance, my note on Group C, l. 321,
demonstrates the exact form and position of the _ale-stake_, and shews that
the old interpretation of 'may-pole' in Speght is wrong, and that
Tyrwhitt's statement as to its being 'set up' is misleading; for its
position was horizontal. And only a little further on, at l. 405, I explain
how the peculiar construction arose which admitted of such a phrase as
'goon a-blakeberied'; an explanation which is duly quoted as mine in the
New E. Dict., s.v. _Begged_.
Nevertheless, provided that correct explanations are given, it makes but
little difference to the reader by whom they were first made. Hence notes
have been included from all accessible sources, and it has not always
seemed to be necessary, in minor instances, to specify whence they are
derived; though this has usually been done.
s. 11. It remains for me to express my great obligations to the labours of
others, and to acknowledge, with thankfulness, their assistance and
guidance.
As regards the texts, my chief debt is to the Chaucer Society, which means,
practically, Dr. Furnivall, through whose zeal and energy so many splendid
and accurate prints of the MSS. have been produced, thus rendering the
actual readings and spellings of the scribes accessible to students in all
countries. It is obvious that, but for such work, no edition of Chaucer
could have been attempted without an enormous increase of labour and a
prodigal expenditure of time.
Next to the MSS., the only authorities of any value are a few of the
earliest prints; viz. those by Caxton, and (in the case of the Envoy to
Bukton) by Julian Notary; and the editions by Thynne and Stowe. Thynne's
text of the Book of the Duchesse is, in _one_ passage, the sole authority;
and his text of the Romaunt of the Rose is, not unfrequently, correct where
the Glasgow MS. is wrong. His text of the House of Fame is also valuable,
and so is that of Caxton; and the same remark applies to some of the Minor
Poems. Both Caxton and Thynne furnish very fair texts of Boethius. Thynne's
version of Troilus follows a good MS., and is worth collation throughout;
but his Legend of Good Women follows a MS. of a very poor type, and his
Treatise on the Astrolabe is decidedly bad. Very little help is to be got
from Thynne as regards the Canterbury Tales; indeed, it is the chief fault
of Tyrwhitt's text that he trusted far too much to the old black-letter
editions.
Stowe's edition of 1561 is useful in the case of A Complaint to his Lady
and Words to Adam. Otherwise, it may usually be ignored.
As regards later editions, I am most indebted to the following.
To Dr. John Koch, for his edition of the shorter Minor Poems, viz. those
which in the present edition are numbered as I. VIII. IX. X., XIII-XVII.,
and XIX. His text is excellent, and there are numerous notes. He has also
written several important criticisms in Anglia, besides a detailed
examination in Englische Studien (xv. 399) of my own edition of the Minor
Poems, published in 1888.
To Dr. Max Lange, whose dissertation on the Book of the Duchesse is careful
and useful.
To Professor Lounsbury, who has published an edition of the Parliament of
Foules, though I have not made much use of it. On the other hand, I am
deeply indebted to him, as many other Chaucer students must be also, for
his great work, in three large volumes, entitled Studies in Chaucer. I
would draw particular attention to his excellent chapters on Chaucer's
Life, in which he separates the true accounts from the false, giving the
latter under the title of 'The Chaucer Legend,' in a chapter which is
highly instructive and furnishes a good example of true criticism. The
subjects entitled 'The Text of Chaucer,' 'The Writings of Chaucer,' 'The
Learning of Chaucer,' 'Chaucer in Literary History,' and 'Chaucer as a
Literary Artist' are all admirably handled, and command, in general, the
reader's assent; though he may wish, at times, that the material could have
been condensed into a shorter space. It seems invidious, in the midst of so
much that is good and acceptable, to express any adverse criticism; but it
is difficult to believe that the linguistic part of the work is as sound as
that which is literary; and many must hope that a time may come when the
author will cease to maintain that The Romaunt of the Rose, in its known
form, is all the product of one author. However this may be, it should be
clearly understood that I fully recognise and thankfully acknowledge the
general value of this helpful book. It is a special pleasure to record that
(by no means in this work alone) the study of Chaucer has received much
encouragement from America.
Dr. Piaget has completely solved the construction of the Compleynt of
Venus, by his recovery of the three original Balades by Sir Otes de
Granson, which are somewhat freely translated by Chaucer in this poem. See
vol. i. pp. 86, 559.
The best general commentary on Boethius is the essay by Mr. H. F. Stewart;
see vol. ii. p. x.
The best commentary on Troilus is Mr. W. M. Rossetti's line by line
collation of Chaucer's work with the Filostrato of Boccaccio. Besides this,
remarkably little has been done with regard to this important poem, with
the splendid exception of the Remarks on the Language of 'Troilus' by Prof.
Kitteredge, only recently issued by the Chaucer Society.
I have already acknowledged the usefulness of Dr. Willert's dissertation on
the House of Fame; see vol. iii. p. xiii. Also of the articles by Dr. Koch;
see the same, p. xv; and of the article by Rambeau, which is surely
somewhat extravagant, though right in the main contention.
Of the Legend of Good Women it has already been said that the chief article
is that by Bech (vol. iii. p. xli); and that some useful notes are given by
Corson. The discovery that the Prologue exists in two separate forms, both
of them being genuine, was really made by Mr. Henry Bradshaw, who was
familiar with the Cambridge MS. (which contains the earlier version) for
some time before he disclosed the full significance of it.
s. 12. As regards the Canterbury Tales, my debts are almost too numerous to
recount. First and foremost, must be mentioned the honoured name of Thomas
Tyrwhitt, whose diligence, sagacity, and discrimination have never been
surpassed by any critic, and to whom are due nearly all the more important
discoveries as to Chaucer's sources. See the admirably just remarks on this
'great scholar' in Lounsbury's Studies in Chaucer, vol. i. pp. 300-5. 'The
sanest of English poets had the good fortune to meet with the sanest of
editors.' And again--'It seems almost too much to hope that a combination
of learning, of critical sagacity, of appreciation of poetry as poetry,
will ever again meet in the person of another willing to assume and
discharge the duties of an editor of Chaucer.'
I would add my humble testimony to Tyrwhitt's unfailing greatness; and it
will readily be understood, that, whenever it becomes necessary, in
consequence of recent linguistic discoveries, to point out that Tyrwhitt's
knowledge of Middle-English grammar was naturally imperfect, certainly from
no fault of his own, I never waver in my admiration of his great qualities.
Even as regards linguistic knowledge, he was certainly in advance of his
time; and it is remarkable to observe with what diligence he once edited
the 'Rowley Poems' of Chatterton, merely as a piece of literary duty,
although he was one of the very first to see that they were hopelessly the
reverse of genuine.
A great deal of information has also been obtained from the notes in the
editions by Thomas Wright and by Bell; from the various publications of the
Chaucer Society, especially from the 'Essays on Chaucer,' by various
authors, and from the 'Originals and Analogues'; from Thor Sundby's
wonderful edition of Albertano of Brescia's Liber Consolationis et
Consilii; from the Essay by Dr. Eilers on the Parson's Tale; and from
various books, notes, and articles, by well-known German critics,
especially Ten Brink, Koch, K[:o]lbing, K[:o]ppel, Zupitza, and others.
Much encouragement and various useful hints have been received from
Professor Hales. If I have anywhere failed to notice the true discoverer of
any important suggestion, each in his due place, I trust it will be
regarded as an oversight. The fact that some points, and even some rather
important ones, were really discovered by myself, is somewhat embarrassing.
I have no wish to claim as my own anything that can, with any shew of
reason, be claimed by another; but would rather say, with Chaucer himself,
that 'I nam but a lewd compilatour of the labour of' other men; 'and with
this swerd shal I sleen envye[9].'
s. 13. PHONETICS. All the more important and somewhat recent discoveries as
regards Middle-English grammar and rhythm are due to the increased
attention paid to phonetics and rhythmical details. It is well known that
this impulse came from America, and was due, as Dr. Ellis has justly said,
to 'the wonderful industry, acuteness, and accuracy' of Prof. F. J. Child,
of Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts. His celebrated 'Observations
on the Language of Chaucer' were well followed up by others; notably by Dr.
Alexander J. Ellis, in his work 'On Early English Pronunciation,' and by
Dr. Sweet, in his 'History of English Sounds' and his First and Second
Middle-English Primers. Also, by Ten Brink, in his admirable work on
'Chaucers Sprache und Verskunst.' The latest essays of this character are,
like the first, from America, viz. the essay on 'The Language of the Legend
of Good Women' by J. M. Manly, and the full and exhaustive essay on 'The
Language of Chaucer's Troilus' by Prof. Kittredge[10].
s. 14. THE GLOSSARY. As regards the Glossary, I have much pleasure in
recording my thanks to Miss Gunning and Miss Wilkinson, of Cambridge, who
prepared the 'slips' recording the references, and, in most cases, the
meanings also, throughout a large portion of the whole work, with
praiseworthy carefulness and patience. My obligations to these two ladies
began many years ago, as they undertook most of the glossarial work of my
smaller edition of the Man of Law's Tale (with others); work which is now
incorporated with the rest. It required some devotion to analyse the
language of Boethius and the Romaunt, of Melibeus and the Parson's Tale,
all of which they successfully undertook.
Mr. Sapsworth, formerly scholar of St. John's College, was the original
compiler of the glossary to the Minor Poems and the Legend of Good Women.
Amongst the pieces which I specially undertook myself, I may mention the
Treatise on the Astrolabe, and some of the Canterbury Tales, including
those of the Miller, the Reeve, the Shipman, the Merchant, and the Wife of
Bath. The original references for the Prioresses Tale (and others) were
made by my wife, more than twenty years ago; and I have, in various ways,
received help from other members of my family. I think Dr. Morris and
myself may claim to have done much for Middle-English by way of compiling
glossaries. Dr. Morris led the way by the very full glossaries to his Early
English Alliterative Poems, Sir Gawayne and the Grene Knight, and Genesis
and Exodus; whilst it fell to my lot to gloss Lancelot of the Laik, the
Romance of Partenay, Piers the Plowman (305 pages, in double columns),
Pierce the Ploughman's Crede, the alliterative Joseph of Arimathie,
Barbour's Bruce (114 pages), The Wars of Alexander[11], and Alexander and
Dindimus[12]; besides preparing the glossary to Specimens of English, Part
III., and rewriting Part II. of the same. In the present instance, I have
revised the meanings assigned and all the references; and I trust that not
many are incorrect.
The glossaries to Chaucer by Tyrwhitt and Dr. Morris are both excellent;
but we now require one on a larger scale.
s. 15. CRITICISM. A brief explanation may here suffice. The conspicuous
avoidance, in this edition, of any approach to what has been called
aesthetic criticism, has been intentional. Let it not be hence inferred
that I fail to appreciate the easy charm of Chaucer's narrative, the
delicious flow of his melodious verse, the saneness of his opinions, the
artistic skill with which his characters are drawn, his gentle humour, and
his broad sympathy. It is left to the professed critic to enlarge upon this
theme; he can be trusted to do it thoroughly.
s. 16. THE DIALECT OF CHAUCER.
The dialect of Chaucer does not materially differ from that which has
become the standard literary language; that is to say, it mainly represents
the East-Midland, as spoken in London and by the students of Oxford and
Cambridge. This dialect, as is well known, is not wholly pure, but is of a
comprehensive nature, admitting several forms that strictly belong to other
dialects, chiefly Northern. Remarkable examples occur in the words _they_,
_their_, _them_, and the verbal form _are_, all of which were originally
Northern. Chaucer, however, does not employ the forms _their_ and _them_,
though he admits the nominative _they_; instead of _their_, he has _her_,
_hir_, _here_, or _hire_ (always monosyllabic); and for _them_ he
invariably has _hem_[13]. Examples of _are_ occur here and there in Chaucer
(see _Are_, _Arn_ in the Glossary), but are remarkably rare; his usual form
is _been_ or _ben_. We even find the Southern _beth_ (F 648). In fact, the
Midland dialect, from its intermediate position, was the one which was most
widely understood; and, in extending its dominion over the other dialects,
occasionally admitted forms that did not originally belong to it.
s. 17. KENTISH FORMS. It is, however, well worth notice that Chaucer was at
one time resident at Greenwich, perhaps during the whole period between
1385 and 1399 (see vol. i. pp. xxxviii, xlii, xlv); and was even chosen a
member of parliament for Kent. The effect of this upon his writings is
rather plainly marked, and has been clearly shewn in my paper on this
subject printed for the Chaucer Society, from which some examples are here
extracted.
The chief test for Kentish is the use of _e_ to represent the A.S. short
_y_, which usually became _u_ in Southern, and _i_ in Midland. Thus the
A.S. verb _cyssan_, to kiss, is represented by the Southern _kussen_, the
Midland _kissen_ (as in literary English), but in Kentish by _kessen_.
Hence we find in Chaucer, the infin. _kisse_, D 1254, and the pt. t.
_kiste_, B 3746, regularly; but we also find the Kentish _kesse_, E 1057,
and the pt. t. _keste_, F 350. We can well understand that these variations
were made for the sake of the rimes, since the riming words are,
respectively, _blisse_, _wiste_, and _stedfastnesse_, _reste_. Other double
forms are _brigge_, _bregge_ (in the compound _Cantebregge_)[14];
_fulfille_, _fulfelle_; _kin_, _ken_; _knitte_, _knette_, and the pp.
_knit_, _knet_[15]; the pp. _y-stint_, _stent_; _thinne_, _thenne_ (thin).
Further, we find Midland _abye_, Kentish _abegge_; and (without
corresponding Midland forms) the Kentish _berien_, to bury; _dent_ (in
_thonder-dent_)[16]; _melle_, a mill; _selle_, a floor, Mod. E. _sill_
(A.S. _syll_); _sherte_, shirt (Icel. _skyrta_); _shetten_ to shut, pp.
_y-shet_ (A.S. _scyttan_); _steren_, to stir (A.S. _styrian_)[17]. In one
case Chaucer uses all three forms, viz. _merie_ (A 208); _mirie_, E 2217,
2326; and _murie_ (A 1386, E 1733). The Southern _murie_ is only resorted
to in order to secure a rime to _Merc['u]rie_.
Another test for Kentish is the use of _[=e]_ for A.S. long _[=y]_; as in
Kentish _fer_, _feer_, A.S. _f[=y]r_, fire. Here, also, we find in Chaucer
the occurrence of duplicate forms. Examples are seen in Midland _dr[=y]e_,
dry (A.S. _dr[=y]ge_), Kentish _dr[=e]ye_; Midland _f[=y]r_, fire (A.S.
_f[=y]r_), Kentish _f[=e]re_, Troil. i. 229, iii. 978; Midland _hid_,
hidden, Kentish _hed_; Midl. _thriste_, to thrust, Kentish _threste_[18].
This use of Kentish forms by Chaucer is of considerable interest. Of
course, they occur still more freely in Gower, who was of a Kentish family.
s. 18. PRONUNCIATION.
The M.E. pronunciation was widely different from the present, especially in
the case of the vowel-sounds. The sounds of the vowels were nearly as in
French and Italian. They can be denoted by phonetic _invariable_ symbols,
here distinguished by being enclosed within marks of parenthesis. I shall
here use the same symbols as are employed in my Principles of English
Etymology. Of course, these symbols must be used as defined. Thus the
symbol (oo), being defined to mean the sound of the German _o_ in _so_,
will not be understood by the reader who pronounces it like the _oo_ in
_root_.
s. 19. VOWELS. (aa), as _a_ in f_a_ther; (a) short, as in _a_ha! (ae), open
long _e_, as _a_ in M_a_ry; (e), open short _e_, as _e_ in b_e_d; (ee),
close long _e_, as _e_ in v_e_il[19]; (i) short, as French _i_ in f_i_n_i_,
or nearly, as Eng. _i_ in f_i_n; (ii), as (_ee_) in d_ee_p: (ao), open long
_o_, as _aw_ in s_aw_, or _o_ in gl_o_ry; (o), open short _o_, as _o_ in
n_o_t; (oo), close long _o_, as _o_ in n_o_te, or _o_ in German s_o_; (u),
as _u_ in f_u_ll; (uu), as _oo_ in f_oo_l; (y), as F. _u_ in F. ['e]c_u_;
(yy), as long G. _[:u]_ in gr_[:u]_n. Also ([*e]), as the final _a_ in
China.
DIPHTHONGS. (ai), as _y_ in fl_y_; (au), as _ow_ in n_ow_; (ei), as _ei_ in
v_ei_l, or _ey_ in pr_ey_; (oi), as _oi_ in b_oi_l.
s. 20. CONSONANTS (SPECIAL). (k), as _c_ in _c_at; (s), as _c_ in _c_ity;
(ch), as _ch_ in _ch_urch; (tch), as in ca_tch_; (th), as voiceless _th_ in
_th_in; (dh), as voiced _th_ in _th_ine. I also use (h), when _not
initial_, to denote a guttural sound, like G. _ch_ in Na_ch_t, Li_ch_t, but
weaker, and slightly varying with the preceding vowel. This sound was
usually denoted by (gh) in Chaucer MSS., but was then rapidly becoming
extinct, with a lengthening of the preceding vowel. Thus the word _light_,
originally (liht), with short _i_ and a strong guttural, was about to
become (liit), in which the guttural has disappeared. At the end of the
fourteenth century, the vowel was already half-long, and the guttural sound
was slight; yet Chaucer never rimes such words as _bright_, _light_,
_right_, with words such as _despyt_, _spite_[20]; cf. p. xxviii. l. 5.
s. 21. An accent is denoted by (.), as in M.E. _name_ (naa.m[*e]), where
the _a_ is long and accented, and the final _e_ is like _a_ in China.
By help of these symbols, it is possible to explain the meaning of the M.E.
symbols employed by the scribe of the Ellesmere MS. of the Canterbury
Tales; which furnishes a sufficient approximate guide for the spelling here
adopted throughout. The scribe of the Fairfax MS., whence many of the Minor
Poems are taken, agrees with the 'Ellesmere' scribe in essentials, though
he makes a large number of grammatical mistakes, owing to the loss (in
pronunciation) of the final _e_ in the fifteenth century.
s. 22. SYMBOLS. The following is a list of the sounds which the symbols
denote.
The forms in thick type are the forms actually written and printed; the
forms within parenthesis denote the spoken sounds.
A short; (a). Ex. _al_ (al); _as_ (az). We have no clear evidence to shew
that the modern _a_ (ae) in _cat_ (kaet) occurs anywhere in Chaucer; though
it is possible that the sound occurred in Southern English, without any
special symbol to represent it[21].
A long, or AA; (aa): (1) at the end of an open syllable, as _age_
(aa.j[*e]); (2) before _s_ or _ce_, as _caas_ or _cas_ (kaas); _face_
(faa.s[*e]).
AI, AY (ei). Ex. _array_ (arei.); _fair_ (feir). As in modern English[22].
Note that modern English does not distinguish _pray_ from _prey_ in
pronunciation; and spells _way_, from A.S. _weg_, with _ay_ instead of
_ey_.
AU, AW (au). Ex. _avaunt_ (avau.nt), riming with mod. E. _count_; _awe_
(au.[*e]).
C, as (k), except before _e_ and _i_: as (s), before _e_ and _i_. As in
modern English. Hence, we find some scribes writing _selle_ for _celle_
(sel.l[*e]), mod. E. _cell_; and conversely, the 'Ellesmere' scribe writes
_celle_ for _selle_ in A 3822, causing a great difficulty; see the note to
the line.
CH (ch); CCH (tch). Ex. _chambre_ (chaam.br[*e]); _cacche_ (cat.ch[*e]).
E short; (e). Ex. _fetheres_ (fedh.rez); the middle _e_ being dropped. It
is often convenient to use the symbol '[e.]' to denote an _e_ that is lost
in pronunciation. Thus we might print 'feth[e.]res' to shew the loss of the
middle _e_ in this word.
E final, unaccented: ([*e]). This final _e_ marks a variety of grammatical
inflections, and is frequently either elided or very slightly sounded, and
sometimes wholly suppressed in some common words. Ex. _swete_ (swee.t[*e]),
sweet. The word _wolde_, would, is often a mere monosyllable: (wuld).
E long and open, or EE; (ae) or ([`e][`e]). Ex. _heeth_ (haeth), or
(h[`e][`e]th). This open _e_ came to be denoted by _ea_, and the symbol,
though not the sound, is commonly preserved in mod. English; as in _heath_
(hiith). Note that this long _e_, at the end of an open syllable, is
usually written with a _single_ letter, as in _clene_ (klae.n[*e]), or
(kl[`e][`e].n[*e]), clean. But _cleene_ also occurs in the MSS.
E long and close, or EE; (ee) or (['e]['e]). Ex. _weep_ (weep), or
(w['e]['e]p). Note that this long _e_, at the end of an open syllable, is
usually written with a _single_ letter, as in _swete_ (swee.t[*e]), sweet.
But _sweete_ is also found in MSS.
EW (ee, _followed by_ w). Ex. _newe_ (nee.w[*e]); with a tendency,
probably, towards the modern sound (iuu), as in _new_ (niuu).
G hard, i.e. (g), as in _gable_ (gaa.bl[*e]) or (gaa.bl), except before _e_
and _i_ in words of French origin. Thus _gilt_ (gilt), guilt, is of A.S.
origin; but _gin_ (jin), a snare, is a shortened form of F. _engin_.
GGE (dj[*e]). Ex. _brigge_ (bridj[*e]).
GH (h), G. _ch_. Ex. _light_ (liiht). As said above, the vowel was at first
short, then half-long, as probably in Chaucer, and then wholly long, when
the (h) dropped out. Later, (ii) became (ei), and is now (ai). Chaucer
never rimes _-ight_ with _-yt_, as in the case of _dight_, _delyt_; Rom. of
the Rose, Fragment B 2555.
GN (n), with long preceding vowel; as _digne_ (dii.n[*e]). As Dr. Sweet
says, the F. _gn_ was perhaps sometimes pronounced as _ny_ (where the _y_
is consonantal), but in familiar conversation was a simple _n_, preceded by
a long vowel or a diphthong.
H (h), as in modern English, when initial. Ex. _hand_ (hand). Chiefly in
words of English origin. In words of French origin, initial _h_ was usually
mute, and is sometimes not written, as in _eyr_ (eir), an heir. In
unemphatic words, it was also frequently mute; so that _hit_ was frequently
written _it_, as in modern English.
I, Y, short; (i). Ex. _him_ (him). Owing to the indistinctness of the old
written character for _i_, when preceding or following _m_ or _n_, the
scribes frequently wrote _y_ instead of it; as in _myd_, _nyl_, _hym_,
_dynt_. But as this indistinctness does not reappear in modern printing, I
have usually restored the true forms _mid_, _nil_, _him_, _dint_; which
enables me to use _y_ as a symbol for long _i_, without confusion. But I
use _y_ finally, as in mod. English. Ex. _many_ (man.i).
I, Y, long; (ii). The scribes prefer the symbol _y_; hence I use it almost
throughout. Ex. _byte_ (bii.t[*e]), bite; _delyt_ (delii.t), delight.
I consonantal, I (j). There was no symbol for _j_ in M.E., though the sound
was common, in words of French origin. The scribes usually wrote _I_, when
the sound was initial, as in _Iay_ (jei), a jay. In the middle of a word,
it is not distinguishable from the vowel, except by the fact that it
precedes a vowel or diphthong, as in _conioyne_ (konjoi.n[*e]), to conjoin.
The old spelling has here been retained, as the use of the modern E. _j_
seemed to involve too great an anachronism; but perhaps this is
unpractical. Fortunately, the sound is not common. It is also denoted by
_g_ before _e_ or _i_, as noted above. Ex. _Iuge_ (jy.j[*e]), judge.
IE (ee); the same as _ee_, long and close. Not common. Ex. _mischief_, also
written _mischeef_ (mischee.f).
LE, often vocalic (l), as in E. _temple_ (temp.l). But note _stables_
(staa.blez).
NG (ngg); always as in E. _linger_. Ex. _thing_ (thingg).
O, short (o), as in _of_ (ov). But here _note particularly_, that it is
always (u), i.e. as _u_ in f_u_ll, wherever it has in mod. E. the sound of
the written _o_ in _company_, _son_, _monk_, _cousin_, &c. Ex. _sonne_
(sun.n[*e]), sun; _sone_ (sun.[*e]), son[23]; _monk_ (mungk); _moche_
(much.[*e]). In fact, the modern spelling arose from the use of _o_ for
_u_, for mere distinctness in the written form, whenever the sound (u)
preceded or followed _m_ or _n_ or _i_; and in a few other cases.
O long and open, or OO; (ao) or ([`o][`o]); mod. E. _au_ in _Paul_, or _a_
in _fall_. Ex. _stoon_ (staon) or (st[`o][`o]n), a stone; pl. _stones_
(stao.nez). See s. 25.
O long and close, or OO; (oo) or (['o]['o]); mod. E. _o_ in _note_, or G.
_o_ in _so_. Ex. _sote_ (soo.t[*e]), sweet; _good_ (good).
N.B. The M.E. _[=o]_ or _oo_ was never pronounced like the mod. E. _oo_ in
_root_ (ruut).
OI, OY (oi). Ex. _noise_ (noi.z[*e]): _voys_ (vois).
OU, OW (uu); except before _gh_. Ex. _flour_ (fluur); _now_ (nuu). Rarely
(aou), as in _soule_ (saou.l[*e]) from the A.S. _s[=a]wol_.
OGH (aouh); with open short _o_ as in E. _not_; the _u_ being very slight,
and perhaps sometimes almost neglected. It is also written _ough_, as
_noght_, _nought_ (naouht). The _u_, in fact, is the result of a peculiar
pronunciation of the _gh_. Dr. Sweet clearly explains that, after _e_, _i_,
the _gh_ (h) was sounded like the G. _ch_ in _ich_. 'This front _gh_ was
vocalized into consonantal _y_ before a vowel, and then generally dropped,
as in the plural _hy[:e]_ (hii._y_[*e])[24]. The other _gh_ had the sound
of G. _ch_ in _auch_ = the G. _ch_ in _ach_ rounded. Hence it is always
preceded either by (uu), as in _ynough_ (inuu.h), _plough_ (pluu.h), or by
_u_ forming the second element of a diphthong. This _u_ is always written
after _a_, as in _taughte_ (tau.ht[*e]), _laughter_ (lau.hter), while after
_o_ it is sometimes written, sometimes left to be inferred from the
following _gh_.' See Sweet, Second Middle-English Primer, p. 5.
R is always strongly trilled; never reduced to a vocal murmur, as
frequently in modern English.
S (s); as in _sit_ (sit). But voiced to _z_ (z) between two vowels, and
finally, as in _ryse_ (rii.z[*e]), to rise, _shoures_ (shuu.rez).
SH (sh), as in modern English, SSH (shsh); as in _fresshe_ (fresh.sh[*e]).
U short; (y). The French sound, as in _Iuge_ (jy.j[*e]). Rarely (u), as in
_cut_ (kut), _ful_ (ful); which are not French words.
U long; (yy). Not common; and only French. Ex. _vertu_ (vertyy.); _nature_
(natyy.r[*e]).
V (v), as in modern English. But the MSS. very rarely use this symbol. The
sound of _v_ was awkwardly denoted by the use of _u_, followed by a vowel;
as in _loue_ (luv.[*e]), love. In the present edition, _v_ is used
throughout to denote the consonant.
WE final; (w[*e]), but often merely (u). Ex. _arwes_ (ar.wez); _bowe_
(b[`o].w[*e], b[`o]u.[*e]); _morwe_ (mor.u). So also _blew_ (blee.u);
_newe_ (nee.w[*e]).
WH (wh), as in the North of England; not a mere _w_, as in the South.
For the sound of _th_, modern English may be taken as the guide; and the
same remark applies to the distinction between _f_ and _v_, and to the
variable sound of _s_. Moreover, every letter should be distinctly sounded;
the _k_ in _knee_ (kn['e]['e]) and the _w_ in _wryte_ (wrii.t[*e]) were
still in use in the time of Chaucer, though now only preserved in the
written forms.
s. 23. It will readily be understood that the M.E. vowel-sounds were
intermediate between those of Anglo-Saxon and of modern English. They can
best be understood by consulting the table at p. 42 of my Primer of English
Etymology; and, for French words, that at p. 126 of my Principles of
English Etymology, Second Series. The pronunciation of M.E. and of
Anglo-French vowels did not materially differ. Instead of here reproducing
these tables, I give the approximate pronunciation of the first eighteen
lines of the Canterbury Tales. But we must remember, that the pronunciation
of words _in a sentence_ is not always the same as when they are taken
singly, owing to the accent (or want of accent) due to their position. The
word _his_ (hiz) may have its initial _h_ aspirated, when standing alone;
but in the phrase _his shoures_, it is taken along with _shoures_, loses
its accent and its initial _h_, and becomes (iz). Words are much affected
by the manner in which they are thus grouped together. I denote this
grouping by the use of a hyphen, and mark the accented syllables by a
sloping stroke over every accented vowel; as is usual[25]. The elided final
_e_ is denoted by ('). There is no elision at the medial pause; see below
(s. 116). The medial pause is here denoted by a sloping stroke, as in the
Ellesmere MS.
Wh['a]n-dhat Apr['i]ll[*e]/ w['i]dh iz-sh['u]urez s['o]ot[*e]
dh[*e]-dr['u]uht' ov-M['a]rch[*e]/ hath-p['e]rsed t['o]o
dh[*e]-r['o]ot[*e],
[*e]nd-b['a]adhed ['e]v'ri v['e]in[*e]/ in-sw['i]ch lik['u]ur,
ov-wh['i]ch vert['y]y/ enj['e]ndred ['i]z dh[*e]-fl['u]ur,
whan-Z['e]fir['u]s ['a]ek/ w['i]dh-iz sw['e]et[*e] br['a]eth
insp['i]ired h['a]th/ in-['e]v'ri h['o]lt [*e]nd-h['a]eth
dhe-t['e]ndre kr['o]pez/ ['a]nd dhe-y['u]ngg[*e] s['u]nn[*e]
h['a]th-in dh[*e]-R['a]m/ iz-h['a]lf[*e] k['u]urs ir['u]nn[*e],
[*e]nd-sm['a]al[*e] f['u]ulez/ m['a]aken m['e]lod['i]i[*e],
dhat-sl['e]epen ['a]l dh[*e]-n['i]iht/ widh-['a]open ['i]i-[*e]--
sao-pr['i]keth h['e]m nat['y]yr[*e]/ in-h['e]r kur['a]ajez--
dhan-l['o]nggen f['o]lk/ too-g['a]on on-p['i]lgrim['a]ajez,
[*e]nd-p['a]lmerz f['o]r too-s['e]eken/ str['a]unj[*e] str['o]ndez
too-f['e]rn[*e] h['a]lwez/ k['u]uth' in-s['u]ndri l['o]ndez;
[*e]nd sp['e]siall['i]i/ from-['e]v'ri sh['i]irez ['e]nd[*e]
ov-['E]nggel['o]nd/ too-K['a]unter.br['i] dhei-w['e]nd[*e],
dh[*e]-h['a]oli bl['i]sful m['a]rtir/ f['o]r too-s['e]ek[*e]
dhat-h['e]m hath-h['o]lpen/ wh['a]n-dhat dh['e]i waer'-s['e]ek[*e].
s. 24. The above example also shews the mode of scanning the lines, as will
be more particularly explained hereafter. It will be seen that the normal
number of accents in the line is five, though the fifth line, quite
exceptionally, has six, with an additional accent at the caesural pause. It
may also be noted here, by the way, that accents are by no means of equal
strength. The accents on _with_ in lines 1 and 5, on _to_ in line 2, and on
_is_ in l. 4, are but slight; whilst those on the former syllables of
_straunge_ and _strondes_ in line 13 are of unusual force.
s. 25. RIMES ILLUSTRATING THE PRONUNCIATION OF LONG O AND LONG E.
It has been said that the values of the M.E. vowels are intermediate
between those of the Anglo-Saxon and the modern vowels. The best and surest
guide to them is afforded by the A.S. sounds, and it is worth while to
illustrate this by special instances.
Let us consider the case of the open and close _o_. These are distinguished
by their origin. Thus open long _o_ (ao) arises (1) from A.S. _[=a]_; or
(2) from the lengthening of A.S. short _o_ at the end of an open syllable.
I have observed that Chaucer frequently makes a difference between the open
_o_ that arises from these two sources.
The M.E. (ao) from A.S. _[=a]_ was doubtless wholly long. Examples occur in
_lore_ (lao.r[*e]), lore, from A.S. _l[=a]r_; and in _more_ (mao.re), more,
from A.S. _m[=a]ra_.
But the M.E. (ao) from the lengthening of A.S. short _o_ was probably
somewhat less full, or only half-long, or perhaps, as Dr. Sweet suggests,
was somewhat closer. At any rate, Chaucer usually makes a difference
between this sound and the former. To keep up the distinction, I shall now
write ([`o][`o]) for the former open _o_, and ([`o]) for the latter; so
that _lore_ and _more_ will be denoted by (l[`o][`o].r[*e]),
(m[`o][`o].r[*e]). Examples of the other (ao) occur in _forlore_
(forl[`o].r[*e]), from A.S. _forloren_, forlorn; _to-fore_
(t['o]['o]-f[`o].r[*e]), from A.S. _t[=o]-foran_; and in the curious word
_more_ (m[`o].r[*e]), a root, from the A.S. _mora_. In the fourth stanza of
Troilus, Book V, Chaucer distinguishes between ([`o][`o]) and ([`o]) in a
very marked manner, since the riming formula of the stanza is _ababbcc_,
i.e. the first line rimes with the third, and the second with the fourth
and fifth. Observe, that Chaucer emphasizes this variation by making a
similar distinction between open and close _e_ in the preceding stanza. I
here give the pronunciation of the whole stanza; and, in order not to
confuse the marks over the (o) with those of accentuation, the accent is
here denoted by (.) placed _after_ the accented vowel or syllable.
dhis-Troo.ilus. widhuu.ten r[`e][`e]d. or-l[`o][`o].r[*e],
az-man. dhat-hath. iz-joi.ez aek. forl[`o].r[*e],
waz-wei.tingg' on. iz-laa.di ev.erm[`o][`o].r[*e],
az-shee. dhat-waz. dh[*e]-sooth.fast krop. [*e]nd-m[`o].r[*e]
ov-al. iz-lust., or-joi.ez heer.toof[`o].r[*e].
but-Troo.ilus., nuu-far.wel al. dhii-joi.[*e],
for-shal.tuu nev.er seen.-ir eft. in-Troi.[*e].
The same distinction is preserved throughout the whole of the poem of
Troilus, as may be seen by the following references, where the numbers
refer, _not_ to the _lines_, but to the stanzas.
_lore_, _more_; I. 93. _sore_, _more_, _sore_; I. 96; where the former
_sore_ is from A.S. _s[=a]re_, adv., and the latter _sore_ is of French
origin[26], _sore_, _more_, _lore_; I. 108, 156; II. 81, 192; III. 35.
_more_, _sore_; III. 139, 151; IV. 19, 129, 161; V. 97, 106, 171. _rore_
(A.S. _r[=a]rian_), _sore_, _more_; IV. 54. _yore_ (A.S. _ge[=a]ra_),
_more_; IV. 214; V. 8. _yore_, _more_, _lore_, V. 47. _evermore_, _more_;
V. 117. _more_, _sore_, _evermore_, V. 194. _more_, _evermore_, _yore_, V.
248. Also: _more_, _Antenore_; IV. 95; where _Antenore_, being a proper
name, may be treated much as the author pleases. And further: _more_,
_restore_, IV. 193; V. 239; where the _o_ in _restore_ is due to Lat. _au_.
And lastly, _pore_, _rore_, V. 7: where the _o_ in _pore_ is of variable
quality, from O.F. _povre_ (Lat. _pauperem_).
On the other hand, we find another set of words in Troilus, in which the
open _o_ was originally short. Examples are: _tofore_, _wherfore_, _bore_,
i.e. born; II. 202: from A.S. _t[=o]foran_; from A.S. _hw[=ae]r_ combined
with _fore_; and A.S. _boren_. _y-shore_, _bifore_, _therfore_; IV. 143;
where _y-shore_, shorn, is from A.S. _gescoren_. _therfore_, _bifore_; IV.
149. _forlore_, _m[)o]re_, _heretofore_, V. 4; already noticed above.
In all the above examples, the open _o_ occurs before _r_; the only other
examples of open _o_ from original short _o_ are seen in Book I. stanzas 13
and 30. In both these stanzas we find the riming words _spoken_, _wroken_,
_broken_, which obviously belong to the same set. _Broken_ is from A.S.
_br[)o]cen_; but _spoken_ and _wroken_ are new forms, altered from the A.S.
_sprecen_ and _wrecen_ by analogy with the very word _broken_ here used.
Chaucer never rimes these words with _t[=o]ken_, from A.S. _t[=a]cen_.
s. 26. An analysis of the rimes in the Minor Poems reveals an exceptional
use of but one word ending in _-ore_, viz. the word _more_. On account,
probably, of its frequency and utility, we find it used to rime with
_heretofore_ and _heerbefore_; both examples occurring in the Book of the
Duchesse, 189, 1127. This shews that the rime was permissible, and the
difference extremely slight. Nevertheless we find, with the exception of
these two instances only, that the Minor Poems again present two distinct
sets of rimes: (1) from A.S. _[=a]_, the words _evermore_, _namore_,
_more_, _sore_, _lore_, _rore_, _yore_, together with _tresore_ (of F.
origin, from Lat. _thesaurum_); and (2) from A.S. _o_, the words _before_,
_bore_, _wherfore_, _lore_ (A.S. _loren_), _herebefore_, _tofore_.
s. 27. In the Legend of Good Women, the result is just the same. The
exceptional rimes are shewn by _m[=o]re_ riming with _before_, 540, 1516;
with _y-swore_, 1284; and with _therfore_, 443. But with these exceptions,
we find, as before: (1) the set of words _more_, _yore_, _sore_, with the
French words _store_ and _radevore_[27]; and (2) the set _bore_,
_forswore_, _swore_ (all past participles), and _therfore_.
s. 28. In the Canterbury Tales, we find from Mr. Cromie's Rime-Index, pp.
185, 189, that the word _m[=o]re_ is again used exceptionally, riming once
with the pp. _bore_, A 1542, and frequently with _before_; but we find,
further, that _before_ is also used exceptionally, riming once with _more_
and _lore_, E 789; once with _sore_, D 631; once with _more_ and _yore_, E
65; and once with _gore_, A 3237, from A.S. _g[=a]r_. Similarly, _therfore_
rimes with _yore_, E 1140. But, with these exceptions, we again find the
two sets kept distinct, viz. (1) _evermore_, _namore_, _more_, _lore_,
_hore_ (from A.S. _h[=a]r_), _gore_, _ore_ (from A.S. _[=a]r_), _rore_,
_sore_; together with the French _restore_; and (2) _before_, _bore_,
_y-bore_, _forlore_, _swore_, _therfore_, _wherfore_[28].
In spite of all the exceptional uses of the two words _more_ and _before_,
we cannot but see, in the above examples, a most remarkable tendency to
keep asunder two vowel-sounds which it must have required a delicate ear to
distinguish. This is interesting, as proving exceptional care on the part
of the author.
We find, accordingly, that later writers did not take the same pains. Thus,
in Lydgate's Complaint of the Black Knight, 218, we find _sore_ (from A.S.
_s[=a]r_) riming with _tore_, pp. (from A.S. _toren_). In Fragment B of the
Romaunt of the Rose, it is startling to find _more_ actually altered to
_mar_ or _mare_ (the Northern form) in order to rime with _thar_ (for
_there_), 1854; with _fare_, 2710; and with _ar_, 2215.
s. 29. OPEN AND CLOSE [=O]. After making the above investigation, we shall
naturally expect to find that Chaucer takes care to distinguish between the
open _[=o]_ and the close one; and such is really the case.
The chief source of long close _o_ is the A.S. and Icel. _[=o]_. Ex.
_b['o]['o]k_, _fors['o]['o]k_, _d['o]m_, _b['o]ne_ (a boon); from A.S.
_b[=o]c_, _fors[=o]c_, _d[=o]m_, and Icel. _b[=o]n_. The distinction
between the two kinds of _o_ is perfectly easy to follow, because the
sounds are still kept apart in modern English, in which the old open long
_o_ is now a close _[=o]_, whilst the old close _[=o]_ is lowered to the
sound of _[=u]_ (uu).
Easy examples occur in A.S. _b[=a]n_, M.E. _boon_ (baon, b[`o][`o]n), mod.
E. _bone_; as contrasted with Icel. _b[=o]n_, M.E. _boon_ (boon,
b['o]['o]n), mod. E. _boon_ (buun). In other words, the mod. E. _bone_ was
pronounced in M.E. so as to rime with _lawn_; whilst the mod. E. _boon_ was
then pronounced so as to rime with _lone_.
A few exceptions occur, shewing occasional relaxations of the general rule.
They are doubtless due, as Ten Brink suggests, to a paucity of rimes in
some particular ending. Thus, when the long _o_ is absolutely final, as in
_go_ (gao), _do_ (doo), Chaucer considers these as _permissible_ rimes, and
pairs them together freely; and owing to such usage, we even find _agoon_
(agaon) riming with _doon_ (doon) in Troilus, ii. l. 410. But this is the
only instance in Troilus of this character; in all other places, the ending
_-oon_ relates to the open _o_; the riming words being _alloon_, _anoon_,
_atoon_, _boon_ (bone), _foon_ (foes, A.S. _fan_), _goon_, _noon_, _stoon_;
to which add _roon_, it rained, _woon_, quantity. In the Cant. Tales, B
3127, we find the rime _d[=o]m_, doom, _h[=o]m_, home; but words in
_-[=o]m_ are, of course, extremely scarce, so that there was little else to
be done. For a like reason, _sooth_ (sooth) sometimes rimes with _wrooth_
(wraoth), Bk. of the Duchesse, 513, 519, 1189; and _sothe_ (soo.dh[*e])
with _bothe_ (bao.dh[*e]), Sec. Nonnes Tale, G 167; Troil. iv. 1035.
With these few exceptions, the rule of distinguishing the two qualities of
_o_ is rigorously observed. Thus we find in Troilus, rimes in _-[`o][`o]t_,
viz. _hoot_, _noot_, _woot_, _wroot_, A.S. _h[=a]t_, _n[=a]t_, _w[=a]t_,
_wr[=a]t_, ii. 890, 1196, iv. 1261. And we find, on the other hand, rimes
in _-['o]['o]t_, viz. _foot_, _moot_, _soot_, A.S. _f[=o]t_, _m[=o]t_,
_s[=o]t_, iii. 1192. Once more, we find, in the same poem, rimes in
_-[`o]te_, viz. _hote_, _note_, _grote_; cf. A.S. _h[=a]te_, adv., A.F.
_note_ (Lat. _n[)o]ta_), O. Friesic _gr[=a]ta_; iv. 583. And yet again,
there are rimes in _-['o]te_, viz. _bote_, _fote_, _rote_, _sote_, from
A.S. _b[=o]t_, _f[=o]t_, Icel. _r[=o]t_, A.S. _sw[=o]te_, adv.; ii. 345,
1378, v. 671, 1245. Every one knows the first rime in the Cant. Tales, that
of _sote_, _rote_, (pronounced as mod. E. _soata_, _roata_)[29].
s. 30. OPEN AND CLOSE [=E]. In like manner, Chaucer distinguishes to some
extent, and with certain rather more numerous exceptions, between the open
and close long e. This is a somewhat more intricate matter, so that it is
best to give the results succinctly. It is also a little more difficult to
follow, because modern English has confused the sounds; though they are
frequently distinguished by a different mode of spelling, the old open _e_
being represented by _ea_, and the old close _e_ by _ee_. A good example
occurs in the case of the words _sea_ and _see_. The former, in Chaucer, is
(sae) or (s[`e][`e]), with long open _e_; whilst the latter is (s['e]['e]),
with long close e. Both were written _see_ in M.E.; with the result, that
the words were spelt alike at that time, though pronounced differently; but
are spelt differently now, though pronounced alike. The difference in
spelling is due to an Elizabethan habit, when the two sounds were purposely
distinguished; and it may be remarked that such words as are spelt with
_ea_ are precisely those which still have a peculiar pronunciation in
Ireland. Some writers try to denote this by using such spellings as _say_,
_tay_, _baste_, _mate_, and the like, instead of the standard English
_sea_, _tea_, _beast_, _meat_.
s. 31. STABLE AND UNSTABLE [=E]. The two kinds of _[=e]_ are best
understood by observing their sources.
Before we can shew these clearly, it is necessary to observe that the A.S.
[=AE] has two values, which must be carefully distinguished. The first,
which I shall call 'stable [=AE],' because it regularly produces an open
_[=e]_ in M.E., answers to Germanic and Gothic _ai_, and is generally due
to mutation. Thus _h[=ae]lan_, to heal, answers to Goth. _hailjan_, and is
mutated from _h[=a]l_, whole, Goth. _hails_. This produced M.E. _h[=e]len_
(hael[*e]n), with open _[=e]_. Again, M.E. _spr[=e]de_, to _spread_ (note
_ea_ in the modern form), answers to a Gothic _*spraidjan_[30]; for,
although no such Gothic form actually occurs, we can infer it from
comparison with the G. _spreiten_; cf. G. _heilen_ with Goth. _hailjan_
above.
The second kind of _[=ae]_, which I shall call the A.S. 'unstable [=AE],'
because it occurs in forms which are treated both ways in Chaucer, answers
to an original Germanic _[=ae]_, Goth, _[=e]_, and does not arise from
mutation, though it may arise from gradation. Thus the M.E. _d[=e]de_,
deed, A.S. _d[=ae]d_, answers to Goth. _gad[=e]ds_, a deed, G. _That_; and
the contrast between the vowel in G. _That_ and that in G. _heilen_, to
heal, is very clearly marked. It is from words of this class that some
trouble arises.
s. 32. If we inquire further, why there should have been any difference of
development in such cases, and how the same form could, apparently, yield
both an open _[=e]_ and a close one, I believe that a clear answer can be
given. For it is precisely in such cases that we find different forms in
the Old Mercian (or Midland) dialect and in the A.S. (or Southern). Thus,
whilst the A.S. (Southern) form of 'deed' was _d[=ae]d_, the Mercian form
was _d[=e]d_. In fact, the mod. E. _deed_ is clearly Mercian, and that is
why it is not spelt with _ea_ in Elizabethan English. Hence Chaucer had,
ready to his use, two forms of this word. One was the Southern
_d[`e][`e]d_, with open _[=e]_, from A.S. _d[=ae]d_; the other was the
Midland _d['e]['e]d_, with close _[=e]_; and, as the Midland dialect was
then rapidly gaining the ascendency, he could hardly go wrong if he
sometimes used the more popular form. Chaucer knew nothing of etymology,
but he knew how words were pronounced by his cotemporaries; a fact which
sufficiently explains his habits.
In order to complete this part of the case, it is necessary to add that the
M.E. _[=e]_ which results from A.S. _[=e]a_ is ALWAYS open[31].
s. 33. A similar ambiguity occurs in the case of a long _e_ which we should
expect to be close. Here again we must distinguish between two kinds. The
A.S. _[=e]o_ yields an M.E. _[=e]_ which is ALWAYS close; as in _d[=e]op_,
deep, M.E. _d['e]['e]p_. Again, there is an A.S. _[=e]_ which results from
mutation, as in A.S. _bl[=e]dan_, to bleed, from _bl[=o]d_, blood; and the
resulting M.E. _[=e]_ is ALWAYS close, as in _bl[=e]den_
(bl['e]['e]d[*e]n), to bleed.
But there is also the UNSTABLE vowel in the M.E. _y-s[=e]ne_, visible. Of
this word the A.S. forms are various; we find _ges[=i]ene_, _ges[=y]ne_,
_ges[=e]ne_, all three. Of these, _ges[=i]ene_ is the earlier spelling of
_ges[=y]ne_, and may be neglected; but _ges[=y]ne_ and _ges[=e]ne_ still
remain. _Ges[=y]ne_ is the usual A.S. (Southern) form, whilst _ges[=e]ne_
is Midland and Northern. From the Midland _ges[=e]ne_ came M.E. _ys[=e]ne_
(is['e]['e]n[*e]), with close _e_, regularly; and this is the form which
Chaucer usually adopts. The A.S. _ges[=y]ne_ would have developed regularly
into M.E. _ys[=y]ne_ (isiin[*e]), just as the A.S. _m[=y]s_ answers to M.E.
_m[=y]s_, mod. E. _mice_. But the _y_-sound was difficult of treatment, as
the true sound (yy) was lost; and Ten Brink has observed a corresponding
variation in the development of A.S. short _y_, which became sometimes
short _i_ and sometimes short open _e_ in M.E. In the same way, I should
suppose that this A.S. long _y_ corresponded to a Kentish long open _e_;
thus producing M.E. _ys[=e]ne_ (is[`e][`e]n[*e]), in which the _e_ was
open. There is a remarkable example of such a variety in the development of
the A.S. _f[=y]r_, fire. This usually became M.E. _fyr_ (fiir), with long
_i_; but in Troilus, i. 229[32], we have the remarkable form _afere_
(af[`e][`e]r[*e]), on fire, riming quite regularly with _were_
(w[`e][`e]r[*e]), were (from A.S. _w[=ae]ron_), and with _stere_, to stir
(from A.S. _styrian_). Indeed _stere_, to stir, is really another example
of the like development, since the _e_ in it is merely lengthened from an
A.S. short _y_.
s. 34. SUMMARY. As this investigation has run to some length, I here give a
summary of all the above results.
OPEN AND CLOSE [=O]. 1. The M.E. open and close _[=o]_ have resulted in
mod. E. sounds which are still kept apart; cf. M.E. _st[`o][`o]n_ and M.E.
_d['o]['o]m_ with the mod. E. _stone_ and _doom_.
2. A.S. _[=a]_ produced M.E. open _[=o]_. A.S. _o_, when lengthened, also
produced M.E. open _[=o]_. But the two M.E. sounds somewhat differed, and
Chaucer avoids riming them together. The few exceptions are noted above;
the commonest of these being due to the variable treatment of the words
_m[=o]re_ and _before_.
3. A.S. and Icel. _[=o]_ produced M.E. close _[=o]_. Chaucer avoids riming
the close _[=o]_ with the open one; the chief exceptions being when the
vowel-sound is final, and in other cases where rimes are scarce.
4. The different spellings of the mod. E. _sea_ and _see_, now pronounced
alike, answer to the different sounds of the M.E. form _see_. If the _ee_
was open, it meant the _sea_; if it was close, it was part of the verb to
_see_.
5. The A.S. _[=e]a_ produced M.E. open _[=e]_.
6. The A.S. _[=ae]_, if answering to Gothic _ai_, produced M.E. open
_[=e]_. But if answering to Goth. _[=e]_, the M.E. _[=e]_ was close in the
Midland dialect, but was allowed to rime with open _[=e]_ in Southern;
giving Chaucer a choice of forms.
7. The A.S. _[=e]o_ and _[=e]_ (if arising from mutation of _[=o]_)
produced M.E. close _[=e]_.
8. In words such as A.S. _ges[=y]ne_, Mercian _ges[=e]ne_, visible, the
M.E. _y-s[=e]ne_ had an _[=e]_ which rimed with open _[=e]_ in Kentish, and
a close _[=e]_ in Midland, giving Chaucer a choice of forms.
s. 35. It will be now easily understood, that Chaucer's general rule, of
avoiding the riming of close _[=e]_ with open _[=e]_, admits of a
considerable number of exceptions, in which the _[=e]_ is really of a
doubtful or unstable character.
It is clear that, in considering Chaucer's forms, we must set aside, as
UNSTABLE, all words in which long _e_ corresponds either to a Germanic
_[=ae]_ (Gothic _[=e]_, German _[=a]_), or otherwise to A.S. unstable
_[=y]_ (Mercian _[=e]_). I proceed to enumerate the chief of these, as
occurring, first of all, in TROILUS.
Words ending in -ECHE. The verb _[=e]che_, to eke, answers to A.S.
_[=y]can_. _Leche_, a leech, is allied to Goth. _l[=e]keis_, a physician.
_Speche_, speech, is from the stem seen in _spr[=ae]c-on_, they spoke, with
the same vowel, originally, as in Goth. _br[=e]kun_, they broke. All these
words have unstable e.
-EDE. _Dede_, deed; A.S. _d[=ae]d_, Goth. _gad[=e]ds_. _Drede_, to dread,
A.S. _on-dr[=ae]dan_, O.H.G. _tr[=a]tan_. From V. 1654-7, it is difficult
to draw any clear inference; _brede_ should have open _[=e]_ (cf. A.S.
_br[=a]d_, Goth. _braids_); _hede_, heed, goes with A.S. _h[=y]dan_, and
its vowel is unstable; and _Diomede_, though the _e_ should be close, is at
proper name, and needs no exact treatment.
-EKE. Besides the correct form _[`e][`e]k_ (A.S. _[=e]ac_), Chaucer has a
form _eke_, with unoriginal final _e_; he probably connected it with the
verb _eche_, to eke, in which the _e_ is unstable, as it arose from
mutation.
_Cheke_ answers to A.S. _c[=e]ace_, Anglian _c[=e]ce_, mod. E. _cheek_; but
here the _[=e]a_ is not the usual A.S. _[=e]a_, being merely due to the
initial _c_, and the West-Germanic type is _*k[=a]k[=a]_ (New E. Dict.),
answering to Germanic _*k[=ae]k[=a]_; whence the A.S. original form
_*c[=ae]ce_; so that the _e_ is unstable, by the rule above given.
-ELE; -ENE. Rimes in _-[=e]le_ and _-[=e]ne_ are all regular. So also in
-EME, -EMETH. The rimes in _[=e]men_ are imperfect.
-EPE. _Slepe_ has unstable _e_; cf. Goth. _sl[=e]pan_.
-ERE. Unstable _e_ occurs in _fere_, fire, as explained above; also in
_here_, to hear, A.S. _h[=y]ran_, _h[=e]ran_; and again, in _dere_, dear,
A.S. _d[=y]re_ (as well as _d[=e]ore_). Also in _yere_, year, because the
_[=e]a_ in A.S. _g[=e]ar_ is not the usual diphthong _[=e]a_, but due to
the preceding _g_; the Goth. form is _j[=e]r_, so that the M.E. is
unstable, by the rule. _Bere_, a bier, is from the verbal stem
_b[=ae]r-on_, corresponding to Goth, _b[=e]run_; hence the _e_ is unstable.
But a real exception occurs in the riming of _lere_, to teach, with _here_,
here (T. ii. 97, iv. 440). _Lere_, A.S. _l[=ae]ran_, Goth. _laisjan_,
should have the open _e_; but it here rimes with a word in which the _e_ is
close. This is one of the exceptional words noted by Ten Brink (_Chaucers
Sprache_, s. 25). No explanation is offered, and I know of none, unless it
be that it was confused with _l['e]re_, cheek, from A.S. _hl[=e]or_. But we
must note the fact.
-ETE. The exceptional words are _bihete_, _mete_ (to dream), _strete_,
street. _Bihete_ is really a false form for _bihote_ (A.S. _bih[=a]tan_);
the _e_ is due to confusion with the pt. t. _bih[=e]t_, where _h[=e]t_ is
for A.S. _h[=e]ht_, the result of contraction; hence the _e_ is doubtful
and unstable. _Mete_, to dream, is from A.S. _m[=ae]tan_, of unknown
origin; hence we may regard the _e_ as doubtful. _Strete_, a street,
answers to A.S. _str[=ae]t_, Mercian _str[=e]t_, mod. E. _street_; hence
the _e_ is unstable, as explained above.
-EVE. Ten Brink (_Ch. Studien_, ss. 25, 23) thinks that _leve_, sb.,
leave, was treated as if with close _e_ by confusion with _bil[=e]ven_, to
believe, which, he says, has close e. Whatever be the right explanation, we
must set aside _leve_, leave, as an exceptional word. So also _eve_, eve,
A.S. _[=ae]fen_, Mercian _[=e]fen_, has a variable vowel; see Sweet, O.E.
Texts, p. 602.
s. 36. Having now considered the doubtful cases, which may be altogether
set aside, it remains to draw up the list of words in which the quality of
the long _e_, at least in Troilus, admits of no doubt. The result gives us
a valuable set of test-rimes, by which the genuineness of a poem attributed
to Chaucer may be investigated. Of course, a _few_ divergences may admit of
explanation; but the presence of a large number of them should make us
extremely suspicious.
The list is as follows.
(A) The following words (in Troilus) have _open e_ only. (I omit some
doubtful cases, in addition to those discussed above; and only give
those which ought certainly to have the open vowel.)
_teche_, to teach.
_dede_, dead; _lede_, lead (the metal); _rede_, red. Also _lede_, to
lead; _sprede_, to spread. Other words in _-ede_ are doubtful.
_breke_, to break, _speke_, to speak, _wreke_, to wreak, have open _e_;
but it was originally short, and these words are kept apart from
others.
_bene_, bean; _clene_, clean; _lene_, lean; _mene_, to mean.
_hepe_, heap; _lepe_, to leap.
_there_, there; _were_, were; _where_, where. Also _ere_, ear; _gere_,
gear; _tere_, a tear. (_Fere_, fear, has unstable _e_; cf. G.
_Gefahr_.)
_bere_, to bear, _dere_, to harm, _swere_, to swear, _tere_, to tear,
besides _bere_, a bear, _spere_, a spear[33], _were_, a weir, _here_,
her, _stere_, to stir, likewise have open _e_; but the _e_ was
originally short, and these words are kept apart from those in the
preceding set.
_bete_, to beat; _grete_, great; _hete_, heat; _spete_, to spit;
_swete_, to sweat; _threte_, to threat. Also _[)e]te_, to eat,
_fory[)e]te_, to forget. (I omit doubtful cases.)
_reve_, to reave; _greve_, a grove. (But _leve_, to leave, is
doubtful.)
(B) The following (in Troilus) have close long _e_ only.
_seche_, to seek; _biseche_, to beseech.
_forbede_, to forbid; _nede_, need; _yede_, went. Also _bede_, to
offer, _blede_, to bleed; _brede_, to breed; _fede_, to feed; _glede_,
a glowing coal; _spede_, to speed; _stede_, a steed.
_meke_, meek; _seke_, to seek.
_bitwene_, between; _grene_, green; _kene_, keen; _quene_, queen;
_tene_, vexation; _wene_, to ween.
_kepe_, to keep; _wepe_, to weep; also _depe_, deep.
_fere_, companion; _yfere_, together; _here_, here.
_bete_, _flete_, _grete_, _mete_, to mend, float, greet, meet; _swete_,
sweet.
_leve_, dear.
s. 37. Of course, the rime-tests consist in this, that not one of the words
in class A can possibly rime with one of those in class B, either in
Troilus or in any genuine work of Chaucer.
To test this, we must first refer to Cromie's Rime-Index to the Canterbury
Tales, under the headings, _-eche_, _-ede_ (_-eede_), _-eke_, _-ene_,
_-epe_, _-ere_, _-ete_, _-eve_.
The only apparent exceptions that I can find are two; and they are worth
notice.
Under _-eepe_, we are told that _leepe_, 3 s. perf., rimes with _keepe_, n.
obj. The reference is to Group A, 2688. When we look, we find that the
Ellesmere MS. has wrong spellings; the words should be _leep_, _keep_. Or
rather, we find that the final _e_ is not real, but only represents a
meaningless flourish in the MS. Now it is a neat point of grammar that,
although _lepen_, to leap (A.S. _hl[=e]apan_), has an open _e_, its past
tense (A.S. _hl[=e]op_) has a close _e_; so that the rime is quite correct.
In both words, the _e_ is close.
The other case (A 1422) is worth citing. Mr. Cromie says, at p. 108, that
_here_, adv., rimes with the inf. _bere_, to bear; which is, in my view,
impossible.
The lines run thus:--
'He fil in office with a chamberleyn,
The which that dwelling was with Emelye.
For he was wys, and coude sone aspye
Of every servaunt, which that serveth _here_.
Wel coude he hewen wode, and water bere.'
This is a case where the sound decides the sense. The _e_ in _bere_ is
properly short; hence the same is true of _here_. Accordingly, _here_ is
not an adverb, nor does it mean 'here'; it is the personal pronoun, A.S.
_hire_, and it means 'her'; precisely as it does in Troilus, ii. 1662.
s. 38. In the Minor Poems, the following passages are the only ones that I
can find that present any difficulty.
In the Death of Blaunche, 1253, we find _need_ riming with _heed_ (head);
so that _need_ has here, apparently, an open e. Ten Brink has noted this
exception (at p. 20), and explains it by remarking that there is a double
form of the word in A.S., viz. _n[=e]ad_ as well as _n[=e]od_. At any rate,
we see that the word _nede_ cannot be relied on as a test-word, and must be
struck out; though there is only this one example of its use with open e.
In the Death of Blaunche, 773, we find _dere_ (dear) riming with _were_,
were. And once more, viz. in Clk. Ta., E 882, we find _were_ riming with
_dere_; but, after all, _dere_ (see s. 35) has unstable e. The Death of
Blaunche presents many difficulties, and the text of it is far more
uncertain and unsatisfactory than that of any other genuine poem.
In the House of Fame, 1885, we find the rime _here_ (here), _lere_ (to
teach). This only shews that _lere_ is here once more used with the close
_e_; I have already said (s. 35) that it is no sure test-word.
I just note the rime of _here_ (here) with _were_ (perplexity); H. Fame,
980. _Were_ is of F. origin; and several such words have the close _e_; see
Ten Brink, p. 48.
In the Legend of Good Women, 1870, we have the unusual rime _there_ (there)
with _dere_ (dear). Ten Brink has noted this (p. 20). He remarks that it is
the only example in which _there_ seems to have close _e_; but it is rather
one of three cases in which _dere_ has open _e_ (from A.S. _d[=y]re_).
These are all the difficulties which I could find, after a search through
the Index to the Minor Poems. The only modifications they suggest are
these: the word _need_ is once found riming with _heed_ (head); and the
word _dere_ (though it usually has a close _e_) really has unstable _e_
(A.S. _d[=e]ore_, _d[=y]re_).
It is interesting to apply the results to other Poems.
The beautiful Roundels entitled Merciless Beauty answer the test
surprisingly (s. 4). In the first stanza, the author uses the rimes
_sustene_, _kene_, _grene_, _quene_, _sene_, where all the vowels are
close, if we include _sene_, which has the variable _e_ (close in Midland).
In the second stanza, the rimes are _pleyne_, _cheyne_, _feyne_, _atteyne_,
_pleyne_, all of French origin, in which the sound is slightly varied to
that of the nearest diphthong. And in the third stanza, we find _lene_,
_bene_, _mene_, v., _clene_, _mene_, s., in which the _e_ is now open.
In the poem called A Compleint to his Lady, the final stanza of which, with
Chaucer's name appended, was discovered by Dr. Furnivall after I had
claimed it for Chaucer, every rime is entirely perfect, and many of them
are highly characteristic of him, being used elsewhere very freely.
The poem which I have called An Amorous Complaint has every rime perfect,
except in l. 16, where the author rimes _do_ (with close _o_) with _wo_,
_go_ (with open _o_). It has already been shown that Chaucer frequently
does this very thing (s. 29).
s. 39. This shews one side of the argument. It is instructive to turn to a
piece like The Complaint of the Black Knight, which we now know to be
Lydgate's, as printed in the Aldine Chaucer, vi. 235. In the very first
stanza we find _white_ riming with _brighte_ and _nighte_, which, to the
student of Chaucer, is sufficiently astonishing. Other non-Chaucerian rimes
are seen in _pitously_, _malady_ (st. 20), where the form should be
_maladye_, and the same error occurs in st. 27; in _ageyn_, _tweyn_, _peyn_
(34), where the latter forms should be _tweyne_, _peyne_; in _forjuged_,
_excused_ (40), which is not a true rime at all; in _ywreke_, _clepe_ (41),
a mere assonance; in _feithfully_, _cry_ (65), where _I cry_ should rather
be _I cry-e_; in _wrecche_, with short _e_, riming with _leche_, _seche_
(68); _seyn_, _peyn_ (for _peyn-e_, 82); _went_ (for _went-e_), pt. t.,
_shent_, pp. (93); _peyn_ (for _peyn-e_), _ayeyn_ (93); _quen-e_,
dissyllabic, _seen_ (miswritten _sene_), monosyllabic, (97). Here are
twelve difficulties in the course of ninety-seven stanzas; but there are
more behind. For the test-words already given above would alone suffice.
The riming of _s[=o]re_ with _tore_ (A.S. _toren_) has already been
noticed, in s. 28. In st. 4, we find _sw['e]te_, sweet, paired off with
_h[`e]te_, heat; in st. 18, we find _gr['e]ne_ paired off with _cl[`e]ne_;
and in st. 86, we have _r[`e]de_, red, paired off with _sp['e]de_, to
speed. That is, we have here four exceptions in the course of 97 stanzas,
being more than can be found in the whole of Chaucer's genuine works put
together. In fact, the indiscriminate riming of close and open _e_ is a
capital test for Lydgate and for work of the fifteenth century. Using this
test alone, we should see cause to suspect The Flower and the Leaf, which
has three false rimes of this class, viz. _[`e]te_, to eat, _sw['e]te_,
sweet (st. 13); _b[`e]te_, pp. beaten, actually riming with the pp. _set_
(31); and _gr['e]ne_ riming with _cl[`e]ne_ (42); not to mention that the
author makes the dissyllabic words _wene_, _grene_, rime with the pp.
_seen_ (36); and again, _grene_, _tene_ rime with the pp. _been_ (56); and
yet again, _grene_ rime with the pp. _seen_ (57), and with _been_ (77). ON
THIS POINT ALONE, the author differs from Chaucer SEVEN times[34]!
The Court of Love differs from Chaucer in instances too many to enumerate;
but, as to this particular point, I only observe the riming of _gr['e]ne_
with _cl[`e]ne_, l. 816; and of _d['e]re_ with _require_, l. 851; but we
may alter _require_ to the Chaucerian form _requere_. At l. 79, we find the
dissyllabic _grene_; it rimes with the monosyllable _been_.
s. 40. Similar tests apply to open and close _o_. We might arrange these,
similarly, into two classes, viz. (A) with the open sound, and (B) with the
close sound; and we should find that they do not rime together; i.e., if we
first eliminate those words which are observed to be of a variable
character. For a few exceptions, see s. 29. I give the list below.
It is also curious to observe that, in Troilus, the words _wolde_, _nolde_,
_sholde_, usually rime together. _Wolde_ rimes with _biholde_ once only,
iii. 115; but _sholde_ never rimes with any words but _wolde_ and _nolde_.
In the Cant. Tales, _wolde_ rimes with several words, but _sholde_ only
with _wolde_ and _nolde_. The only exception is in the Book of the Duchess,
1200, where _sholde_ rimes with _tolde_. It would greatly improve the sense
as well as the metre to substitute _wolde_ for _sholde_ in this passage.
s. 41. Now that I have exemplified the mode of using these test-words, I
give fuller lists, slightly augmented by help of Mr. Cromie's Rime-Index,
and adding a third class (C) of words which have a variable vowel, and are
therefore _not_ available as test-words; for it is useful to know the
character of these also.
The following is THE KEY to the meaning of the lists.
1. (A) contains words with open long _e_ and open long _o_. The _chief_
sources of open long _e_ are (1) A.S. _[=e]a_ and (2) the stable A.S.
_[=ae]_ answering to Goth. _ai_ (O.H.G. _ei_) and usually due to mutation
of A.S. _[=a]_. We may include words with A.S. short _e_, though these
often keep the vowel somewhat short; perhaps it was only half-long.
The sources of open long _o_ are (1) A.S. _[=a]_ and (2) a lengthening of
A.S. short _o_; perhaps the latter was only half-long.
2. (B) contains words with close long _e_ and close long _o_. The _chief_
sources of close long _e_ are (1) A.S. _[=e]o_ and (2) A.S. _[=e]_ (from
mutation of _[=o]_). The chief source of close long _o_ is A.S. _[=o]_.
3. (C) contains words with variable long _e_ and variable long _o_. The
chief source of variable long _e_ is the unstable A.S. _[=ae]_ answering to
Gothic _[=e]_ (Germanic _[=a]_); this _[=ae]_ occurs in _spr[=ae]c-on_,
third stem of the strong verb _sprecan_, and in its derivative
_spr[=ae]ce_, whence M.E. _speche_, speech. It also appears to arise from
sounds corresponding to A.S. _[=i]e_, _[=y]_, mutation of _[=e]a_, _[=e]o_.
CHAUCER'S USE. Words in (A) rime with each other, but never rime with words
in (B). Words in (B) rime with each other, but never with words in (A).
Words in (C) rime with words both in (A) and (B).
-ECHE. (A) _t[`e]che_, _bit[`e]che_. (B) _s['e]che_, _bis['e]che_. (C)
_eche_, to eke, _leche_, _speche_.
-EDE. (A) _dede_, dead, _hede_, head, _lede_, lead (metal), _rede_,
red, _sprede_, to spread. (B) _bede_, to offer, _blede_, v., _brede_,
v., _crede_, _fede_, _forbede_, _glede_, _nede_[35], _spede_, v.,
_stede_, a steed. (C) _dede_, deed, _drede_, s. and v., _hede_, to
heed, _rede_, to advise. Words in _-hede_ almost always shew open _e_,
but a few exceptions occur.
-EKE. (A) _br[)e]ke_, v., _sp[)e]ke_, v., _wr[)e]ke_, v., _awr[)e]ke_,
_ywr[)e]ke,_ with (original) short _e_; _leke_, leek. (B) _meke_,
_seke_, v., _seke_, sick, _biseke_.
-ENE. (A) _bene_, bean, _clene_, _lene_, adj., _mene_, to mean,
_unclene_. (B) _bitwene_, _grene_, _kene_, _quene_, _tene_, vexation,
_wene_, v. (C) _sene_, adj., visible, _y-sene_ (the same), _shene_,
bright[36].
-EPE. (A) _chepe_, to buy, _hepe_, _lepe_, v., _stepe_, bright. (B)
_crepe_, v., _depe_, _kepe_, _wepe_. (C) _slepe_.
-ERE. (A) _b[)e]re_, a bear, _b[)e]re_, to bear, _d[)e]re_, to harm,
_[)e]re_, to plough, _h[)e]re_, her, _sp[)e]re_, spear, _st[)e]re_, to
stir, _sw[)e]re_, to swear, _t[)e]re_, to tear, _w[)e]re_, a weir,
_w[)e]re_, to defend; all with (original) short e. Also _ere_, ear,
_gere_, gear, _tere_, tear; and _there_[37], _were_[38], _where_. (B)
_fere_, companion, _here_, here, _yfere_, together. (Here belong the F.
words, _chere_, _clere_, _manere_, _matere_, _spere_, sphere.) (C)
_bere_, bier, _dere_, dear[39], _fere_, fear, _here_, to hear, _lere_,
to teach, _yere_, year.
-ETE. (A) _bete_, to beat, _grete_, great, _hete_, heat, _spete_, to
spit, _swete_, to sweat, _threte_, v., _wete_, wet, _ybete_, beaten.
Also _[)e]te_, to eat, _fory[)e]te_, to forget, _m[)e]te_, meat
(originally with short _e_). (B) _bete_, to mend, _flete_, to float,
_grete_, to greet, _swete_, sweet. (C) _bihete_, to promise, _forlete_,
to let go, _lete_, to let, _mete_, to dream, _shete_, sheet, _strete_,
street.
-EVE. (A) _bireve_, _deve_, pl., deaf, _greve_, grove, _reve_, to
reave. (B) _leve_, dear, _reve_, a reeve. (C) _eve_, eve, _leve_, to
believe, _bileve_, belief, _leve_, to permit. Note that _yeve_, to
give, usually rimes with _live_, to live, as in mod. English.
-O. All words in _-o_ are allowed to rime together; of these, _to_,
_therto_, _unto_, _do_, _fordo_ should have the close sound.
-OLDE. _Nolde_, _sholde_, _wolde_, usually rime together. Occasionally
_wolde_ rimes with other words. In only one case does _sholde_ rime
with _tolde_ (B. Duch. 1200), where _wolde_ would make better sense.
-ONE. (A) _alone_, _echone_, _bone_, bone, _grone_, to groan, _lone_,
loan, _mone_, to moan, _one_, one. (B) _bone_, boon, _eftsone_, _mone_,
moon, _sone_, soon. (C) _done_, to do. [Note that _s[)o]ne_, son,
_w[)o]ne_, to dwell, are really written for _sune_, _wune_, and only
rime with each other.]
-ONGE. [Note that _songe_, pp., _spronge_, pp., _tonge_, _yonge_, are
really written for _sunge_, _sprunge_, _tunge_, _yunge_. They rime
together, but are quite distinct from _fonge_, _honge_, _longe_,
_stronge_, _wronge_; just as in mod. English.]
-OOK. (A) _ook_, _strook_. (B) _awook_, _book_, _cook_, _forsook_,
_hook_, _look_, _quook_, _shook_, _took_, _wook_.
-OOT. (A) _boot_, he bit, _goot_, goat, _hoot_, hot, _noot_, know not,
_smoot_, smote, _woot_, know, _wroot_, wrote. (B) _foot_, _moot_, must,
_soot_.
-OOTH. (A) _clooth_, _gooth_, _looth_, _ooth_, _wrooth_. (B) _dooth_,
_sooth_, _tooth_.
-ORE. _Bifore_, _bore_, pp., born, _forlore_, pp., _more_, a root,
_shore_, pp., _swore_, pp., _therfore_, _wherfore_, originally had a
short _o_, and usually rime together. _Hore_, pl., hoary, _lore_,
_more_, _rore_, _sore_, _yore_, have open long _o_, and usually rime
together. In a few cases, _bifore_ and _more_ rime with words in the
other set.
-OTE. (A) _grote_, groat, _hote_, hot, _throte_, throat (from A.S.
_throtu_). (B) _bote_, satisfaction, _fote_, _rote_, root, _swote_,
sweet.
The above lists are offered for what they are worth. I believe them to be
fairly correct; but they may not be quite exhaustive. Nevertheless, they
record ascertained facts; and the facts remain true and useful, even if the
theories be wrong.
s. 42. SOME PECULIARITIES OF RIME.
The subject of Chaucer's rimes is fully discussed by Ten Brink; _Studien_,
p. 190. As the critical reader will necessarily consult this work, it is
only necessary to give here a few of the chief results.
Chaucer's rimes are usually either (1) masculine, or (2) feminine.
Masculine rimes are those in which the rime is confined to _a single_ final
syllable, as 'lic_our_,' 'fl_our_'; Prol. l. 3. Feminine rimes are those in
which the rime extends through _two_ syllables, as 's_ote_,' 'r_ote_';
Prol. l. 1. It is necessary to remember that _every_ unaccented final _e_
at the end of a line is to be sounded, and constitutes a syllable.
Sometimes the rime extends, apparently, over more than two syllables; but
it will be found that, in such a case, the penultimate or antepenultimate
syllable can either be suppressed, or consists of the shortest possible
sound. Ex. _sw['e]venis_, _sw['e]ven is_, really _sw['e]v'nis_, _sw['e]v'n
is_; B 4111. _B['e]ryis_, _m['e]ry is_; B 4155. _Vict['o]ri[:e]_,
_gl['o]ri[:e]_; A 2405. _Merc['u]ri[:e]_, _m['u]ry[:e]_; A 1385.
_M['a]ri[:e]d_, _t['a]ri[:e]d_; B 3461. _B['e]ri[:e]d_,
_a-bl['a]keb['e]ri[:e]d_; C 405. _To-sc['a]t'red_, _y-fl['a]t'red_; D 1969.
_Contr['a]ri[:e]_, _Ianu['a]ri[:e]_; E 2319; &c.[40] Note that feminine
rimes are extremely numerous, and are sometimes kept up through whole
stanzas in such a poem as Troilus. Thus, in Troilus, iii. 407-434, we find
four consecutive stanzas, or twenty-eight consecutive lines, in which every
rime is feminine; and this is by no means an extreme case. Feminine rimes
are extremely old in English, and are found even in Anglo-Saxon.
s. 43. The most striking examples are those in which the feminine rime is
composed of two distinct words, as these prove at once the reality of the
final _-e_. Thus _Ro-me_ rimes with _t['o] me_; A 671. _You-the_ rimes with
_allow thee_ (aluu.dhe); F 675. _Ty-me_, with _by me_; G 1204. Similarly,
the final _-es_ of the plural substantive constitutes a syllable, as shewn
by such a rime as _werk-[:e]s_, _derk is_; G 64. In such a case, some
scribes write _werkis_ for _werkes_, to make the rime more complete, but it
is quite needless, as there is no necessity for an absolute coincidence of
vowel-sound in a mere unaccented syllable. In Lenvoy a Scogan, 15, it would
be quite absurd to alter _goddes_ to _goddis_(!), merely because it rimes
with _forbod'is_; the really weak part of the rime is in the linking of the
short _o_ in _goddes_, with the longer _o_ in _forbode_. For the same
reason, the rime of _lyte is_ with _dytees_ (HF. 621) is good enough;
indeed, we cannot write _dytis_ (as Ten Brink proposes to do) because the
word meant is the plural of _ditee_. Unusual rimes of this sort are still
in common use, especially where a slightly humorous effect is intended; and
this may very well excuse the above examples, as well as such rimes as
_Davit_[41] (for _David_), _eructavit_, D 1933; _saveth_, _significavit_, A
661; _wounded_, _wounde hid_, B 102; _agon is_, _onis_[42], D 9; and the
like.
s. 44. There are several cases in which the rimes are rather to be
considered as permissible than exact. The frequent riming of _go_ (gao)
with _do_ (doo) has already been noted. Similarly, owing to the paucity of
words ending in open _[=e]_, the word _s[`e][`e]_, sea, is allowed to rime
with close _[=e]_. The proper M.E. form of 'beast' is _b[`e][`e]st_, which
rimes, exactly, with _[`e][`e]st_, east, and with _alm[`e][`e]st_, almost;
but, inexactly, with _for[`e]st_, in which the _e_ is short. Yet, in Sir
Thopas, B 1944-8, we find the words _forest_, _best_, _est_, _almest_, all
reduced by the scribe to the same apparent form. In G 1324, we find
_br['e]['e]st_ (A.S. _br[=e]ost_), breast, riming with _pr['e]['e]st_,
priest, exactly; but elsewhere _br['e]['e]st_ is treated as if the _e_ were
short, so that it rimes with _lest_ (Kentish form of _lust_), A 2983; E
617. The mod. E. form suggests that the vowel was beginning to be
shortened. In the rime _up[)o]n_, _g[=o]n_, G 562, the _o_ in the former
word is short, but in the latter is long; both are open, and the rime is
admissible. A similar variation in vowel-length is seen in the riming of
_h[)a]dde_, had, with _bl[=a]de_, blade, A 617, and with _sp[=a]de_, spade,
A 553; and here again, some scribes try to better the matter by using the
form _hade_. The rime is really (had.d[*e]), (spaa.d[*e]); and the right
lesson to be learnt from it is, that the _a_ in _spade_ was still (aa), and
thus very different in sound from the _a_ in mod. E. _spade_ (speid). Long
and short _u_ are rimed in _hous_ (huus), _Caucasus_ (kau.kasus.) D 1139;
and elsewhere. Note _neyghebores_, _dores_[43], i.e. (nei.h[*e]buu.rez),
(du.rez); in HF. 649. One of the most licentious rimes is in Troil. ii.
933, viz. _riden_, _abiden_, _yeden_, properly (rid.n), (abid.n),
(y['e]['e]d.n); which suggests that _yeden_ is here (y[)e]d.n); and we are
reminded of the M.E. form of the verb 'to give,' which hovers between
_y[)e]ven_ and _yiven_, and rimes in Chaucer with _liven_, to live, though
frequently written _yeven_. The singular form _y[=e]de_ rimes with _nede_
(n['e]['e].d[*e]) in G 1280, and with _dede_ (d['e]['e].d[*e]) in G 1140.
Chaucer certainly sometimes uses two forms of the same word; the most
noticeable are _heer_ and _here_ for 'here'; _theer_ and _there_ for
'there'; _eek_ and _eke_ for 'eek.' These can be explained by the tendency
to add a final _-e_ in adverbial forms. Of course the double form was
highly convenient. Remarkable double forms are _chivachy[:e]_, A 85, and
_chevauchee_, Mars, 144; _perry[:e]_, A 2936, and _perree_, B 3550.
s. 45. REPETITIONS. Such rimes as _aff-ecciouns_, _prot-ecciouns_, F 55,
wherein the penultimate and antepenultimate syllables are repeated, are
disliked by later writers. Chaucer had found many such in Le Roman de la
Rose[44]. In discussing such repeated rimes as _seke_, to seek, _seke_,
sick, A 17, we must remember that they are common in Old French poetry,
though it was usual for the poet to take care that the repeated forms
should be used _in different senses_. This rule Chaucer usually observes;
cf. _s['e]['e]_, see, _s[`e][`e]_, sea, A 3615; _here_, here, _here_, to
hear, A 4339; _style_, style, _style_, a stile, F 105; _fern_, fern,
_fern_, long ago, F 255; &c. But he also allowed himself such repetitions
as _nones_, _noon is_, A 523; _clerkes_, _clerk is_, B 4425; _places_,
_place is_, D 1767; &c. We now avoid such rimes as _acordes_, _cordes_, HF.
695; _acorde_, _recorde_, Parl. Foules, 608; and still more, such rimes
(all too easy) as _goodnesse_, _soothfastnesse_, E 793; _soothfastnesse_,
_wrecchednesse_, I 34; _more_, _evermore_, Anelida, 240.
s. 46. MISTAKES AS TO CHAUCER'S USES. Some of the facts concerning
Chaucer's rimes have been misunderstood, even by so good a scholar as Prof.
Lounsbury, in his Studies of Chaucer, vol. ii[45]. It is therefore
desirable to point out some of these errors.
He calls attention, among others, to the following false rimes:--
_Desyre_, _manere_, T. iv. 817 (p. 54). But the right reading is _martyre_,
which alone makes sense. For the actual use of the false rime here
censured, see Rom. Rose, 2779.
_Kinde_, _binde_, _wende_, T. iii. 1437 (p. 54). Read _winde_, that thou
mayst wind. 'Gower will furnish a number of similar illustrations' (p.
54)[46].
Prof. Lounsbury is extremely anxious to prove that assonances (i.e. such
imperfect rimes as we see in _kepe_, _eke_, with a mere correspondence in
the vowel-sound only) occur in Chaucer; and endeavours to strengthen his
position by considering various difficult rimes. At p. 60, he says: 'All
difficulty with _crown_ and _person_ (R.R. 3201) disappears the moment they
receive the forms _coroun_ and _persoun_ (as in Gower, iii. 112, 141, 227,
234).' But Gower has no such forms; he has _cor['o]ne_, _pers['o]ne_ in
every instance, emphasised by the use of _cor['o]ned_, _envir['o]ned_ (iii.
112), and by such lines as, 'If it in his pers['o]n-e be'; ii. 202. Chaucer
rimes _persone_ with _allone_, D 1162; and with _done_, T. ii. 701, 1485,
iv. 83; and he uses the forms _c['o]rone_ or _c['o]roune_ and _cor['o]ne_.
But R.R. 3201 has, 'And on hir heed she hadde a _crown_'; and, only two
lines below, has the dissyllabic _crownet_.
'Gower,' we are told, 'rymes the preterite _had_ with _bed_, _leiser_ with
_desire_, and _dore_, a door, with the verb _dare_, in the form _dore_'; p.
64. Gower does none of these things; he rimes the correct preterite
_hedde_[47], which means 'hid,' and which Pauli (regardless of sense) turns
into _hadde_, with the form _a-bedde_ (i. 256). Further, he rimes _desir_
with _leiser_, according to Pauli (ii. 95); but there is no reason why
Gower may not have meant to use the form _leisir_, since that is the true
A.F. form corresponding to O.F. _loisir_ (still in use)[48]. Lastly, Gower
rimes _dore_ (dur[*e]), a door, with _dore_ (dur[*e]), the 1st p. pr. subj.
of the verb _durren_, to dare, corresponding to A.S. _durre_ (ii. 96). The
fact that the pres. indicative is _dar_, with a different vowel, has
nothing to do with the passage in question. It is the critic, not Gower,
who is here at fault; even Gower must have known that _dar_ is
monosyllabic, and could not possibly rime with the dissyllabic sb. _dore_.
Chaucer uses 'the pp. _smitted_ for _smitten_'; T. v. 1545; p. 65. Not so;
_smitted_ and _smitten_ are totally different words.
Chaucer uses 'the form _houn_ for _hound_'; T. iv. 210; p. 65. What _howne_
means, I do not know; but, as it is dissyllabic, it cannot mean _hound_;
nor has it any connection therewith.
'In HF. 959, the infin. _demeine_ is found riming with _seyen_'; p. 71. Not
so; it rimes with the dative of the infinitive, _to seyne_ (A.S. _t[=o]
secganne_); precisely as _to seyne_ rimes with _reyne_ in F 313. In the
face of this quotation, the next remark loses all its point, viz. that 'the
suggestive fact about this peculiarity of ryme is that it is not found in
the Canterbury Tales'; the answer being, that it _is_ found there. So
again, we find _to seyne_, _peyne_, Parl. Foules, 78.
Next we read--'if it be contended that the usage is based upon the
derivation of one of the forms from the A.S. gerundial ending _-anne_, it
is enough to reply that its occurrence in these cases is not borne out by
the poet's practice elsewhere'; p. 71. Of course, it is _not_ enough; for
we cannot divorce Chaucer's language from the general usage of
Middle-English, in which very few forms of this character had survived.
Even if it _were_ enough, the assertion that there is no other such case
happens not to be true; for we often find _to done_; as in A 3543, 3778, B
770, D 2194, F 334, G 932, I 62.
And again, we find _to sene_, riming with _grene_, A 1035. And yet again,
_to bene_, Rom. Rose, 1265. It is impossible to respect arguments which
derive all their apparent force from the principle of heaping one mistake
upon another.
s. 47. It is tedious to reply to special pleading of this kind. Thus, at p.
72, I am quoted, correctly, as objecting to the false rime in R. Rose,
1981, where the acc. pl. _feet_ is made to pair with the infinitive _lete_.
And we are told that 'the force of this example is altogether impaired by
the fact that in the Man of Lawes Tale (B 1104) the same plural rimes with
the infin. _mete_.' So far from impairing my argument, the 'fact'
strengthens it immensely; for, in that passage, we have no longer to do
with the acc. _feet_, but with the _dative_ plural in the phrase _to
fet-e_, answering to the A.S. phrase _to f[=o]tum_, which just makes all
the difference. Correctly, it should be _to f[=o]te_; but the _[=e]_ was,
by this time, so strongly associated with the plural use, that _to f[=e]te_
took its place.
We see that the _e_ was sounded, because there is a third riming word, in
the phrase _in the strete_. Stratmann's Dictionary duly notes this very
passage. It is, however, true that Chaucer is not always consistent about
this; he has _under fete_, riming with _swete_, Book of the Duchess, 399;
_in a strete_, riming with _on my fete_, HF. 1049; but in the Cant. Tales,
we find _at his feet_, A 2047; _al about hir feet_, A 2075; _unto his
beddes feet_, A 4213. The one thing which he does not do is to use _fete_
in the accusative, which is precisely what the author of Fragment B of the
Romaunt does; unless, as is more likely, he drops the _-e_ of the infin.
_lete_, which Chaucer invariably keeps (at any rate when final). We can
easily understand the suppression of a final _e_; but it is difficult to
understand why a writer should invent one.
Once more, when I argue that the rime of _entente_ with the adj. _present_
in R. Rose, 5869, does not accord with Chaucer's usage, the reply is made
(p. 72) that _entent_ rimes with the pp. _shent_ in the Man of Lawes Tale
(B 930). But it is clear that Chaucer here has _entente_ as usual, and
rimes it with the form _shent-e_, which is the pp. treated as a _plural_
adjective; as in several other places.
Next (on p. 72), Gower is rated for riming the prep. _for_ with the pp.
_forlore_; Gower, C.A. ii. 239. But Gower's phrase is 'that thou art comen
fore'; and I suspect that he knew the language of his own time. The _fore_
may answer to the A.S. _fore_, on account of (Grein, i. 320); or, more
probably, _that ... fore_ was taken as the equivalent of _therfore_, which
constantly takes the final _e_, as in Chaucer, E 1141.
On p. 72, again, it is said that, in F 1273, Chaucer rimes the pt. t.
_broght-e_ with _nought_, i.e. he uses the incorrect form _broght_. This
charge, for once, is quite true, and it is as well to say at once, that
Chaucer's rimes are not _quite_ immaculate; but his sins of this
description are not, after all, very numerous, and not by any means so
numerous as Prof. Lounsbury, for the purpose of his argument, would have us
believe. The only right method is to make out a fair list, without
straining to make it much worse than it should be.
s. 48. In his Studies, vol. i. pp. 402-5, Prof. Lounsbury makes another
attack upon the unfortunate poet's rimes. Many of his instances are wrong;
so much so, that four of Chaucer's supposed errors and two of Gower's are
admitted to be no errors in vol. iii. 453. It would have been well if all
the rest of the charges had been withdrawn at the same time. I here draw
attention to them accordingly.
'In Parl. Foules, 121, the preterite _broughte_ rymes with the pp.
_wrought_.' Answer; the rimes are: _broght-e_, _y-wroght-e_, _thoght-e_;
the form _y-wroghte_ occurs in the phrase 'with lettres large y-wroghte,'
where _y-wroghte_ is treated as a plural adjective; and there is no error
at all.
'In Troilus, i. 463, the pp. _fled_ rymes with the preterite _bredde_.' As
before, the phrase is: 'Alle othere dredes weren from him _fledde_.' Here
_fledde_ is treated as a plural adjective, and there is no error at all.
One would have thought that Chaucer knew something of the language of his
time.
'In Troilus, ii. 1079, the pp. _excused_ [rimes] with the preterite
_accusede_.' But the preterite of _accusen_ was _accused_; the addition of
the full suffix _-ede_ is rare, and chiefly confined to monosyllabic roots.
'In Troil. iv. 1422, the pp. _sprad_ [rimes] with the preterite _hadde_'
The line ends, 'with herte and eres _spradde_'; where _spradde_ is treated
as a plural adjective. No error.
'In Troil. v. 1758, the preterite _mette_ [rimes] with the pp. _whet_.' It
is the same story; the phrase is 'hir speres weren _whette_.' No error.
'In the Legend, 786, the preterite _heryede_ rymes with the pp. _beryed_.'
As the usual preterite was _heryed_ (_h['e]r-y-ed-e_ being too cumbrous and
almost unpronounceable), there is no error.
'In the Legend, 2384, the pp. _served_ [rimes] with the preterite
_deservede_' But the preterite was _deserved_. The full ending _-ede_ was
seldom added to roots of more than one syllable, least of all when the verb
happened to be of French origin. By ignoring the habits of the language of
Chaucer's time, such objections might have been largely multiplied; it is
surprising to find that so few have been noted.
'In the Knightes Tale, A 2343, the preterite _signifyede_ rymes with the
pp. _cried_.' However, the preterite was _signifyed_.
'In the Man of Lawes Tale, B 559, the preterite _mette_ rymes with the pp.
_yshet_; [in B 435] the pp. _converted_ with the preterite _astertede_; [in
B 547] the pp. _exiled_ with the preterite _bigilede_; and [in B 1115] the
pp. _ymet_ with the infin. _lette_ and the preterite _sette_.' All the
charges against Chaucer break down. The pp. _yshet_ is properly _yshette_,
plural. The preterite of _asterten_ is _asterted_. The preterite of
_bigilen_ is _bigiled_. And the pp. _ymet_ should be _ymette_, plural. A
critic who imagines that such cumbrous preterites as _astertede_ and
_bigilede_ were in common use, should be asked to read Middle-English
authors till he meets with a few examples of them.
'In the Clerkes Tale, E 498, the preterite _amevede_ rimes with the pp.
_agreved_.' But the preterite was _ameved_.
'In the Somnours Tale, D 1833, the pp. _amended_ rymes with the preterite
_defendede_.' But the preterite was _defended_. Similarly, the preterites
_redressede_, _tariede_, _espyede_, _cryede_, _eylede_, _sewede_ are
conjured up to put Chaucer in the wrong; an argument which requires no
serious refutation. So far was Chaucer from using the form _espyede_ that,
whenever he desires to vary from the form _espyed_, he naturally uses the
form _espyde_, as in G 1230. Our ancestors were but human; they did not
mind saying either _espyed_ or _espyde_; but _espy-e-de_ was a little too
much.
'In the Compl. of Mars, 65, the preterite _com_ rymes with the pp.
_overcome_; but as in this instance, there is a possibility that _com_ may
be deemed a relic of the ancient subj. usage, and therefore entitled to a
final _e_, the example will not be insisted upon at this point.' This seems
to suggest, as an alternative, that _come_ may be the preterite
subjunctive; however it is neither the preterite nor the preterite
subjunctive, but simply the present subjunctive, being perfectly correct.
The line is: 'That dwell'th in solitud-e til she come,' i.e. that dwells
[present tense] in solitude till she may come. The preterite subj.
_c[=o]me_ would have a long close _o_, and could not possibly rime (in
Chaucer) with the short _u_ in _overcome_ (aoverkum[*e]).
It is objected to Legend, 1391, that the insertion of _hath_ causes 'the
adj. _goode_, of the definite declension, to be shorn of its final _e_ in
pronunciation.' The line is: 'As shal the good-man that therfor hath
payed,' where _good-man_ is a compound word, occurring in Matt. xxiv. 43,
and elsewhere; and it is interesting to find that Chaucer even uses _good
men_ in the vocative plural, instead of _good-e_ men, as a familiar form of
address; B 4630. If, as seems to be proposed, we remove the word _hath_,
and read _good-e_, we get: 'As shal the good-e man that therfor payed';
which rimes just as well as before, _payed_ being an admissible form of the
preterite, as well as _payde_. But then the epithet _goode_ becomes
comparatively otiose.
In the Legend, 1696, it is maintained that _wroghte_ is a past participle.
It is surely a preterite, the word _they_, i.e. the besiegers, being
understood. This is a little forced, but it cannot be helped. To take it as
a pp. gives no sense; for it then becomes, 'the siege lay full long, and
(was) little wrought.' To 'work a siege' would be a harsh expression. If,
on the other hand, we are to understand _was_ before _wrought_, we may just
as well understand _they_. It is quite as easy.
s. 49. My position is, in short, that the attack upon Chaucer in this
passage (Studies in Chaucer, i. 402-405) fails in every single instance. It
is called 'a formidable' list; but is nothing of the kind. The attack
against Gower also fails in every single instance. Omitting the two charges
which the author himself withdraws, the passage (p. 405) runs thus:--
'In the Confessio Amantis, the preterites _herde_, _wente_, _tremblede_,
and _com_ will be found ryming respectively with the past participles
_answerd_, _went_, _assembled_, and _overcome_ (see i. 151, ii. 7, iii.
263, 350). He has also the infin. _wedde_ ryming with the pp. _sped_ (iii.
265).'
Answer. _Herde_ rimes with the _plural_ pp. _answerde_. In ii. 7, the text
is wrong, and makes nonsense[49]. _Trembled_ is a correct preterite.
_C[=o]m_ could not rime with _overc[)o]me_ in the least, if it were a
preterite; the reading _c[)o]me_ is right, and represents the pres. sing.
subj. = may come. In iii. 265, the reading is obviously false, as the line
consists of _eleven_ syllables; we have merely to strike out _were_, which
reduces the line to the normal length, and turns the pp. _sped_ into the
pt. t. _spedde_, correctly. The syllables should have been counted.
s. 50. ASSONANCES. I have drawn attention to the above passages because it
affords an opportunity of illustrating Chaucer's habits. I have said that
Prof. Lounsbury is very anxious to fasten upon Chaucer the charge of using
mere assonances, i.e. syllables in which nothing rimes but the vowel-sound;
for specimens of which see vol. i. p. 5. I doubt if the charge can be
fairly proved. But it is well to examine the cases.
Book of the Duchesse, 79, 80. L. 79 ends with _terme_. L. 80, according to
Thynne's edition[50], ends in _yerne_. The correction of _yerne_ to _erme_,
which produces a perfect rime, is so obvious, that it occurred to Mr.
Bradshaw, to myself, and to Ten Brink (to the best of my belief)
independently. As the reading _yerne_ is due to no MS., but rests upon
Thynne, who is, practically, the sole authority for ll. 31-96, I decline to
bow down to him; seeing that Chaucer himself uses _erme_ elsewhere (C 312),
to rime with the same word _terme_.
In Troil. v. 9, most MSS. have _clere_, to rime with _grene_ and _quene_; a
mere assonance. But, as some MSS. have _shene_ (see vol. ii. p. lxxii), it
seems absurd to reject such an easy correction. In the Parl. Foules, 296,
the same two words _grene_ and _quene_ rime with 'the somer-sonne _shene_';
a highly suggestive fact. And in the Cant. Tales, _shene_ rimes six times
with _grene_, and three times with _queene_, and with no other word except
_sustene_ (once); which is, again, a suggestive fact.
Only one more instance is known, viz. in Troil. ii. 884, where _syke_ rimes
with _endyte_ and _whyte_. It is not impossible that Chaucer wrote _syte_;
see my note.
These three doubtful instances, being all that have been found in the whole
of Chaucer's works, compare favourably, to say the least, with the six
indubitable instances occurring in Fragment B (only) of the Romaunt of the
Rose; see vol. i. p. 5. In calculating in errors, we must observe the
percentage.
When every mistake, or rather slight inaccuracy or licence, that can be
found in Chaucer's works, has been reckoned to his discredit, it will still
be found that he observes certain laws with rigid persistence; and it is
possible to use these observed peculiarities as tests whereby to enable us
to reject decisively such poems as have been attributed to him with more
zeal than judgement. It is my deliberate opinion, for example, that
Fragment B of the Romaunt of the Rose shews so many deviations[51] from his
known habits of riming as to render it impossible that he had anything to
do with it.
s. 51. ENDINGS IN -Y and -Y-E. The non-riming of _-y_ with _-y-[:e]_ (see
vol. i. p. 5) is a test which cannot be ignored; and it is better to accept
its guidance than to attempt to circumvent it, if we would be free from
bias.
Even on this point, Prof. Lounsbury is incorrect. In his anxiety to make
out a case, he tells us (Studies, i. 389) that the adjective _dry_,
'whether used attributively or predicatively,' rimes always with words of
the _-y[:e]_ group, whereas _sly_ is sometimes (correctly) monosyllabic.
The two words are essentially different. _Sly_, from Icel. _sloegr_, is
monosyllabic when used indefinitely; whereas 'dry' answers to M.E. _drye_,
A.S. _dr[=y]ge_, and was never a monosyllable till its final _-e_ at last
dropped off. Chaucer handles these two words in different ways, in strict
accordance with their etymology.
Yet again (i. 390) he accuses Gower of a false rime in his Confessio
Amantis, iii. 320, because he rimes _enemy_ with _envy-e_. This is a
serious charge; but an examination of the passage explains the riddle. The
answer is that, in this particular passage, the right reading is _enemy-e_,
because the word is feminine, as it refers to a woman. The distinction
between O.F. _enemi_ (Lat. _inimicum_) and _enemi[:e]_ (Lat. _inimica_) is
clear enough in O.F. poetry, as Gower knew very well; and there is no
reason why he should not have used his knowledge. The noticeable point is,
that every charge of this character, when it comes to be explained, tells
precisely the other way. The attempt to prove Chaucer wrong, where he
happens to be precisely right, does him more good than harm.
s. 52. METRES AND FORMS OF VERSE.
In the List of Chaucer's Works in vol. i. p. lxii, the various forms of his
metre are noticed. It is certain that he adapted most of them from French,
especially from Guillaume de Machault, though he no doubt improved the
general structure of his lines by the study of Italian models. He nowhere
employs Boccaccio's _ottava rima_, and only once attempted a short piece in
Dante's _terza rima_, in the Compleint to his Lady. However, this attempt
is of unique interest, as Dante's verse was never again imitated till about
1540, when Sir Thomas Wiat wrote his Three Satires.
s. 53. OLD VERSE-FORMS. Chaucer was but little indebted to the forms of
English verse used by his predecessors. He doubtless adopted the line of
four accents for his translation of The Romaunt of the Rose, because such
was the metre of the original. Still, this metre was in use long before his
time. It was employed by Wace and Gaimar, and we have an excellent specimen
of it in English in the Lay of Havelok, written before A.D. 1300; as well
as a long example in the Cursor Mundi. It is also the metre employed by
Barbour in his 'Bruce,' and by Gower in his 'Confessio Amantis.' Chaucer
employed it in his translation of the Romaunt; in his Ceys and Alcioun,
portions of which survive in the Book of the Duchesse; in the Book of the
Duchesse itself; and in the House of Fame. Very likely he employed it also
in the lost Book of the Lion, as Machault's Dit du Lion is in this metre.
The ballad-metre which appears, in varying forms, in Sir Thopas, was also
older than Chaucer's time; it is obvious that this poem is a burlesque.
The four-line stanza employed in the 'Proverbs' was also already known:
see, for example, 'The Five Joys of the Virgin,' in An Old Eng. Miscellany,
ed. Morris, p. 87.
s. 54. THE EIGHT-LINE STANZA. The poet's first attempt at naturalising a
French metre in stanzas, as far as we know, was in his A B C; although the
original of this poem is in a different metre. The metre must have been
known to Machault, of whose poems only fragments appear in Tarb['e]'s
edition; for good examples, see the works of Eustache Deschamps. The same
metre is used in the Monkes Tale, the Former Age, and Lenvoy to Bukton;
and, thrice repeated, with a refrain, in the Balade to Rosemounde, Fortune,
and the Complaint of Venus. It was afterwards taken up by Hoccleve and
Lydgate, and by G. Douglas, in his 'King Hart,' but is not a particularly
favourite metre. However, with the addition of an Alexandrine line at the
end, it became the famous Spenserian stanza of the Faerie Queene[52].
s. 55. THE SEVEN-LINE STANZA. His next achievement was of vast importance.
He naturalised the famous seven-line stanza, employed by Machault in
several poems, one of which evidently furnished the refrain of Against
Women Unconstant; and this is good evidence in favour of the genuineness of
this Balade. On account of the great interest attaching to this metre, I
here transcribe Machault's Balade in full. And I take occasion to remark,
at the same time, that it illustrates the absurdity of an unlucky
suggestion that has been lately made, viz. that 'all Balades must needs
have an _envoy_, and that envoys to some of Chaucer's Balades must have
been lost[53].'
BALLADE: by GUILLAUME de MACHAULT (ed. Tarb['e], p. 55).
Se pour ce muir qu'amours ay bien servi,
Fait mauvais servir si fait signour;
Ne je n'ay pas, ce croy, mort desservi
Pour bien amer de tr[`e]s loial amour[54].
Mais je voy bien que finer faut un jour,
Quant je congnois et voy tout en appert
Qu'en lieu de bleu, Dame, vous vestez vert.
H['e]las! Dame, je vous ay tant chieri
En desirant de merci la doucour[55],
Que je n'ay mais sens ne pooir en mi,
Tant qu'ont min['e] mi soupir et mi plour.
Et m'esp['e]rance est morte sans retour[56],
Quant souvenirs me monstre [`a] d['e]couvert
Qu'en lieu de bleu, Dame, vous vestez vert.
Pour ce maudi les iex dont je vous vi,
L'eure, le jour, et le tr[`e]s cointe atour,
Et la biaut['e] qui ont mon cuer ravi,
Et la plaisir enyvr['e] de folour,
Le dous regart qui me mist en errour;
Et loyaut['e] qui souffre et a souffert
Qu'en lieu de bleu, Dame, vous vestez vert.
This metre is much used by our poet; it occurs in the Lyf of St. Cecile,
the Clerkes Tale, the original Palamon and Arcite, the Compleint to his
Lady, An Amorous Complaint, Complaint unto Pit[`e], Anelida, Of the
Wretched Engendring of Mankinde, the Man of Lawes Tale, the Compleint of
Mars, Troilus, Words to Adam, Parliament of Foules, the Prioresses Tale,
and Lenvoy to Scogan. It occurs thrice repeated, with a refrain, in Against
Women Unconstant, Compleint to his Purs, Lak of Stedfastnesse, Gentilesse,
and Truth; as well as in the Balade introduced into the Legend of Good
Women, ll. 249-269.
The Envoy to 'Fortune' also consists of a seven-line stanza, but the
arrangement of the rimes is different, there being only two rimes in place
of the usual three.
This metre was much used by Hoccleve, Lydgate, King James I of Scotland,
and others; but is now uncommon.
s. 56. TERZA RIMA. We have only a few lines of _terza rima_, in the
Compleint to his Lady; see vol. i. p. 76.
s. 57. TEN-LINE STANZA. A ten-line stanza occurs in the Compleint to his
Lady. Perhaps it was an experiment; and perhaps it is somewhat of a
failure. The Envoy to the Complaint of Venus also consists of 10 lines.
s. 58. NINE-LINE STANZAS. Chaucer has two nine-line stanzas. Of these, the
former has the rimes arranged according to the formula _aabaabbab_, which
occurs in Anelida[57]: and two of these stanzas are rendered much more
complex, by the use of internal rimes. As this metre is rare, it is perhaps
worth noticing that it was employed by Gawain Douglas in his Palace of
Honour; and that in the last three stanzas of that poem he even imitates
these internal rimes.
The other nine-line stanza, with the formula _aabaabbcc_, occurs in the
Complaint of Mars.
s. 59. OTHER STANZAS. A six-line stanza (_ababcb_), repeated six times,
forms the Envoy to the Clerkes Tale.
There is another six-line stanza (_ababaa_) in the Envoy to Womanly
Noblesse; vol. iv. p. xxvi.
A five-line stanza occurs in the Envoy to the Complaint to his Purse. It
was copied in the poem called The Cuckoo and the Nightingale.
s. 60. In Anelida, 256-271, and 317-324, we have two unique stanzas, with
lines of varying lengths; the rime-formula being _aaabaaab_, repeated in
the inverse order _bbbabbba_. This may be called a virelay in the English
sense, and is possibly what Chaucer intended by that name[58].
s. 61. ROUNDELS. Four Roundels occur; three in Merciless Beautee; and one
in the Parliament of Foules. For the structure of the Roundel, see vol. i.
p. 524.
s. 62. It readily appears that Chaucer was a great metrist, and bestowed
many new forms of metre upon our literature. Most of them were, of course,
simply borrowed and adapted from French; but it is possible that a few of
them were due to his own constructive ability. The poems called Anelida and
A Complaint to his Lady exhibit clear examples of his experiments in
metrical construction; and he has given us several examples of his skill in
overcoming the difficulties of rime. Of these, the chief are The Complaint
of Venus, with 72 lines on 9 rimes; The Balade to Rosemounde, with 24 lines
on 3 rimes; Womanly Noblesse, with 33 lines on 4 rimes; and the Envoy to
the Clerkes Tale, with 36 lines on only 3 rimes.
s. 63. BALADES AND TERNS. The usual form for a Balade was in three stanzas,
with a refrain. This rule is partially observed, not only in Balades, but
in other poems. Chaucer was fond of grouping his stanzas by threes; such a
group has been called a Tern. For examples, see the latter part of the
Complaint to Pit[`e], in three groups of three stanzas each; the five
groups of three stanzas at the end of the Complaint of Mars; the three
stanzas forming the Proem to Anelida; the three groups of three stanzas
each in Fortune; and the Triple Roundel. The latter part of the Compleint
to his Lady consists of nine stanzas, i.e. thrice three. The Envoy to
Scogan has six stanzas, i.e. twice three; whilst the Envoy to Bukton has
three only.
s. 64. ENVOYS. There are, usually, _no_ Envoys to Chaucer's Balades. There
is one to Fortune, called Lenvoy de Fortune; one addressed to King Richard
II, at the end of Lak of Stedfastnesse; one addressed to Scogan; and one
addressed to Bukton. That appended to the Complaint to his Purs was
obviously supplied at a later date; whilst the so-called Envoy to Truth
(only found in one MS.) is hardly an Envoy at all, but merely an additional
stanza, in the same strain as the rest.
s. 65. THE HEROIC COUPLET. But Chaucer's greatest metrical gift to England
was his use of the Heroic Couplet, which he employed with remarkable
success, first in the Legend of Good Women, and soon after, in his
Canterbury Tales. This he may well have borrowed from Machault, as has been
already explained above; see vol. iii. p. 383, and note 2 on the same page.
The heroic couplet was first copied by Lydgate, who wrote in it two poems
of great length, the Siege of Thebes and the Troy-boke. It was also used by
Henry the Minstrel in his patriotic poem named the Wallace. It is
remarkable that it was almost entirely neglected by Dunbar; the only piece
in this metre that is certainly his is one of 34 lines called 'In Prays of
Woman.' However, a much longer piece entitled The Freiris of Berwick has
also been attributed to him. This metre was also employed by Gawain Douglas
in his translation of Vergil.
s. 66. GRAMMATICAL OUTLINES OF CHAUCER'S ENGLISH.
I shall only attempt here a general outline of the most distinguishing
characteristics of the grammatical forms used by Chaucer. The student will
necessarily consult such works as Prof. Child's Observations on the
Language of Chaucer and Gower, which refer to the Canterbury Tales only;
the Observations on the Language of Chaucer's Troilus, by Prof. Kittredge
(published for the Chaucer Society); the Observations on the Language of
Chaucer's Legend of Good Women, by J. M. Manly (in Studies and Notes on
Philology and Literature, vol. ii; Ginn and Co., Boston, 1893); and Ten
Brink's compact and excellent volume entitled Chaucers Sprache und
Verskunst; Leipzig, 1884.
It would be easy to devote a large volume to the study of Chaucer's
grammatical forms. The forms of the substantives, in particular, are
frequently variable, sometimes on account of their accentuation, which is
accommodated to the line in which they happen to occur, and sometimes for
reasons which appear somewhat arbitrary. Nothing short of complete lists
can satisfy the scholar.
At the same time, such lists are rather bewildering. I therefore attempt
here a sketch of the general principles by which Chaucer's usage appears to
be regulated; whilst at the same time the reader is requested to remember
that most of the rules given below are subject to exceptions; and that
sometimes such exceptions are rather numerous. But it is plain that we must
begin with general rules.
s. 67. GENERAL RULES. Before noticing these, the following _empirical_
rules for the reading of Chaucer's verse may conveniently be here repeated.
Cf. vol. v. p. xxiii.
1. Always pronounce the final _-es_, _-ed_, _-en_, _-er_, or _-e_ in any
word, as a distinct and separate syllable at the _end_ of a line and at the
caesural pause; so also elsewhere, with the exceptions noted here below,
and a few others.
2. The final _-e_ is almost invariably elided, and other light syllables
(chiefly final _-ed_, _-en_, _-er_, _-es_, _-y_) are slurred over and
nearly absorbed, whenever the word next following begins with a vowel or is
one of certain words beginning with _h_, viz. (1) a pronoun, as _he_,
_his_, _him_, _her_, _hem_: (2) part of the verb _have_: (3) _heer_ and
_how_: (4) mute _h_ in a French word, such as _honour_. Ex. _ev'r_, A
50[59]; _rid'n_, A 57; _ov'ral_, A 249; _ov'rest_, A 290; _fith'l_, 296;
_get'n_, 291; _som'r_, 394; _wat'r_, 400; _many_, 406.
NOTE. The caesural pause prevents elision.
3. The final _-e_ is frequently, but not always, suppressed in a few common
words (best learnt by observation), such as _were_, _hadde_, _wolde_,
_sholde_, and some others. _Thise_, these, is invariably monosyllabic. So
also, the medial _-e_ is usually suppressed in such words as _havenes_
(haavnez)[60], _othere_ (oodhr[*e]) _owene_ (aou.n[*e]), _everich_
(aevrich), _sovereyn_ (suvrein). Similarly, the second _e_ is dropped in
_t['a]vernes_ (tav.ernz), when the accent is on the first syllable. If it
be on the second, then the word is trisyllabic: (taver.nez). Accentuation
plays an important part in determining the forms of words.
These three rules meet a large number of cases. Exceptions should be
noticed as they arise; and it will usually be found that the exception can
be justified.
s. 68. THE STRONG DECLENSION OF SUBSTANTIVES. The forms of substantives
frequently present much difficulty in individual cases. The primary rules
are these.
1. Substantives which end in a vowel in Anglo-Saxon, in the nominative
case, take a final _-e_ in Chaucer, in the nom. and dative. The accusative
may be taken to be the same as the nominative in every instance.
The A.S. masculine and neuter nouns include _jo_-stems (Sievers, A.S. Gram.
ed. Cook, sect. 246), as _ende_[61]; short _i_-stems (s. 262), as _mete_,
A 127; short _u_-stems (s. 270), as _wode_, wood; as well as sbs. of the
weak declension, as _ape_.
The A.S. _wo_-stems give M.E. final _-we_, reduced to (u) in pronunciation,
as in _sparwe_ (spar.u). The A.S. feminines in _-u_ give M.E. final _-e_;
as _sake_, _dore_. Feminine sbs. of the weak declension end in final _-e_,
as _tonge_, tongue.
2. Most of the A.S. monosyllabic feminine nouns with a long stem-syllable
take a final _-e_ in Chaucer, in the nom., acc., and dative, doubtless
because all the oblique cases were dissyllabic. And owing to this tendency,
some A.S. monosyllabic nouns of the masculine and neuter genders do the
same.
Ex. A.S. _l[=a]r_, lore, Ch. _lore_ (never _loor_); A.S. _borh_, a pledge,
Ch. _borwe_. Prof. Child remarks that 'two forms not unfrequently occur,
one with, and the other without, the vowel.' Ex. _carte_, acc., B 4208;
_cart_, acc., D 1539.
3. The monosyllabic sbs. in Chaucer (i.e. sbs. having no final _-e_) mostly
correspond to A.S. masculine and neuter _o_-stems (Sievers, s. 238). If a
final _-e_ appears, it is usually in the dative case; but even in this
case, it is frequently dropped. Ex. _arm_ (of the body), _boor_, a boar,
_breeth_, breath, _corn_, _deer_, _stoon_. Datives: _breeth_, A 5; _doom_,
F 928; _day_, A 19; _ring_, F 247; _folk_, A 25; _gold_, A 160. Datives in
_-e_; _horne_, Book Duch. 376; _londe_, B 522; _horse_, T. v. 37.
Many of these dative forms may be explained as occurring in 'petrified'
phrases, i.e. to phrases (involving datives) that were in common use.
'These,' says Mr. Manly, 'are the phrases which have given rise to the
supposition that the regular ending of the dative in Chaucer is _-e_. An
examination of the facts, however, will shew that this is not true. The
dative ending was preserved in certain phrases which were transmitted and
used as phrases, the force of the dative as such being no longer felt. This
will appear from a comparison of such phrases as _a bedde_, _to bedde_,
_over borde_, _to dethe_, _for fere_, _a-fere_ (afire), _to-hepe_,
_a-lyve_, _a-slepe_, _to wyve_, _to the brimme_.' So also _to rede_, T. iv.
679: _in house_, D 352. Nevertheless, a few true datives in _-e_ occur,
though they are certainly scarce. We can hardly explain the use of _horne_
in Book Duch. 376 as occurring in a petrified phrase. Cf. also _on a
berne_, C 397; _of his lone_, D 1861; and, in particular, the curious
instances in which the A.S. nom. has disappeared. Thus the A.S. _h[=i]w_ is
always _hewe_ in Chaucer, in all cases; the A.S. _gr[=a]f_ is always
_grove_; the A.S. _hol_ is _hole_; _sore_ in A 2743 is a nom. case; and so
on.
s. 69. ARCHAISMS. The easiest way of understanding Chaucer's language is to
remember that it is _archaic_; the use of the final _-e_ was fast
disappearing, and he probably was anxious to retain it for the sake of
metrical effect. He could not but have remarked its usefulness in Old
French poetry; and his study of Italian must have led him to admire the
frequency of the vowel-endings in that language. But the use of the English
final _-e_ had become extremely uncertain, owing to the complete fusion of
the nom. and acc., and the loss (to a large extent) of the dative, except
in old phrases which contained (usually) some common preposition.
s. 70. THREE TYPES OF STRONG SUBSTANTIVES. If I may beg leave to offer my
own view of the forms of Chaucer's substantives of the strong declensions,
I should be inclined to explain his usages in the following way.
Let us put aside the weak declension, and the etymology of the A.S. words,
and let us look at the actual forms of the singular nouns. And, since the
genitive case, in Chaucer, usually has a form of its own, let us consider
the nom., acc., and dative only.
All the representative words given in Sievers (A.S. Gram. s. 238, &c.) can
be collected under a few general types, for the present purpose. The fem.
sb. _giefu_ had the accus. _giefe_; but as _-u_ and _-e_ both became _-e_
at a later period, the nom. and acc. are, practically, alike.
Further, datives in _-a_, as _sun-a_, _feld-a_, became datives in _-e_, and
may here be so considered. Hence, in very late A.S. and in Early English,
we find, neglecting stems in _-r_, the few words which shew mutation in the
dative, and others which do not affect the general result, the following
uses.
1. Every dative case ends in _-e_.
2. Every accusative resembles either the nominative or the dative; if the
latter, it ends in _-e_.
Hence, there are ONLY THREE main types, which we may illustrate by the
words _d[=o]m_, _ende_, and _l[=a]r_. The A.S. _d[=o]m_ became M.E. _doom_,
whilst the form _ende_ persisted without any change of spelling.
The A.S. _l[=a]r_ would, we should expect, become M.E. _loor_, which may
here represent it, provisionally, for the present purpose (I substitute it
for the type _[=a]r_ in Sievers, merely as being a commoner word). The
resulting forms are, accordingly, these:--
A. B. C.
nom. acc. _end-e_ (nom. _loor_) nom. acc. _doom_
dat. _end-e_. dat. acc. _lor-e_. dat. _dom-e_.
A. As to this type, there could be no hesitation; all such words would
naturally retain the final _-e_ for a considerable period. Examples appear
in _ende_, end, and words declined like it, such as M.E. _herd-e_,
herdsman, _l[=e]che_, physician, _wyte_, punishment; and numerous agential
words in _-ere_, as _mill['e]re_, miller. Also in A.S. _giefu_, and words
declined like it, such as M.E. _care_, care; _shame_, shame; _sake_, sake;
_love_, love. Also in A.S. _wine_, _sife_, and words like them, such as
M.E. _mete_, meat, _stede_, stead, _reye_, rye, _hate_, hate, _spere_,
spear. Also in A.S. _sunu_, son, _wudu_, wood; M.E. _sone_, _wode_. Also in
A.S. _duru_, door, _nosu_, nose; M.E. _dore_, _nose_.
B. In type B, we have a majority for the form _lor-e_; the Early E. nom.
_loor_ gave way, and is seldom found, so that _lore_ became the standard
type, in Chaucer, for nom., dat., and acc. alike.
Examples occur in A.S. _l[=a]r_, and words like it, as M.E. _fore_,
journey, path, _halle_, hall, _sorwe_, sorrow, _stounde_, time, _wounde_,
wound, _ore_, mercy. Also in A.S. _b[=e]n_, petition, and words like it,
such as M.E. _quene_, queen; _hyde_, hide, skin; _tyde_, time; _dede_,
deed.
C. In type C, the nom. and acc. combined against the dative form.
Consequently, the monosyllabic form prevailed, in this instance only, for
all cases. Nevertheless, the dative in _-e_ is not uncommon, owing, as has
been said, to its preservation in particular phrases. Besides which, it
occurs sporadically after some prepositions. It must be remembered that the
dative form was once very common, owing to its use after some very common
prepositions, such as _at_, _by_, _in_, _of_, _on_, _to_. Examples of the
monosyllabic nominative occur in A.S. _d[=o]m_, and words declined like it,
as M.E. _ooth_, oath, _ring_, _arm_ (of the body), _erl_, _mouth_, _dreem_,
dream, _boon_, bone, _deer_, _fyr_, fire, _wyf_; _day_, _path_, _staf_,
_ship_, _writ_, _shoo_. Also in A.S. _secg_, and words declined like it, as
_net_, _bed_, _wed_. Also in A.S. _wyrm_, and words declined like it, as
M.E. _deel_, deal, part, _gest_, guest, _hil_, _dint_, _loon_, loan,
_wight_. Examples of datives occur in _a-fyre_, _to wyve_, _a-bedde_, _to
wedde_, _lone_ (see Glossary).
If we thus consider the whole history, I think it becomes clear that the
form of the dative in _-e_ is really of considerable importance. It occurs,
of course, in type A; it helps to determine type B; and, even in type C, is
not always suppressed.
s. 71. EFFECT OF ACCENT. I add two more notes before dismissing this part
of the subject. One is, that such a word as _millere_ is only trisyllabic
when accented on the penultimate, as in A 542. When accented on the _first_
syllable, the final _e_ is dropped in pronunciation, and some scribes drop
it in the written form also; see A 545. There are many such instances in
words of French origin. A large number of sbs. in _-ing_, derived from
verbal roots, come under this rule. In the middle of the verse, the
dissyllabic form is usual, as _yelding_, A 596, _woning_, A 606. But at the
end of the line, the trisyllabic form occurs frequently, owing to the
accent, especially in order to secure a rime with an infinitive mood. Thus
in A 1616 we find _beddinge_, which rimes with _bringe_, and is accented on
the _i_.
s. 72. DOUBLE FORMS. The other remark which I have to make here is, that
double forms of a word are not uncommon in Anglo-Saxon; and we find double
forms in M.E. corresponding to them. A notable instance occurs in the A.S.
_gewil_, will, a strong sb., beside A.S. _willa_, will, a weak sb. Hence
Chaucer has both _wil_ and _wille_; see the Glossarial Index.
s. 73. THE WEAK DECLENSION. The three A.S. types are _steorra_, star,
masc.; _tunge_, tongue, fem.; and _[=e]age_, eye, neuter. In M.E., the
genders were disregarded, and all three types became merged in one, with
final _-e_. Hence Chaucer has _sterre_, star, _tonge_, tongue, _y[:e]_,
eye; with one invariable form for the nom., acc., and dative.
A.S. WORDS IN -EN. A.S. words ending in _-en_ usually drop the _-n_ in M.E.
Hence, in place of the A.S. _[=ae]fen_, Chaucer has _eve_; though _even_
also occurs. So also _game_ for A.S. _gamen_; _kinrede_, A.S.
_cyn-r[=ae]den_; _mayde_, A.S. _maegden_; _morwe_, A.S. _morgen_.
s. 74. GENITIVE SINGULAR. The genitive almost invariably ends in _-es_[62],
sometimes shortened to _-s_. Ex. _cherles_, _maydens_. A few old feminines
in _-e_ occur occasionally; as _halle_, _helle_, _love_ (in the comp.
_loveday_). A few genitives in _-e_ are due to the A.S. _-an_ of the weak
declension; as _herte_, _sonne_, _cherche_, _widwe_. Here belongs _lady_
(short for _lady-e_). _Hevene_ occurs as well as _hevenes_. The gen. of
_fader_, father, is both _fader_ and _fadres_.
s. 75. DATIVE SINGULAR. As explained above, the dative ends in _-e_, except
for words of type C (s. 70). The accusative always resembles the
nominative.
s. 76. PLURALS. The usual ending is _-es_ (also written _-is_) or _-s_; as
_dayes_, _maydens_. The same ending is usually employed even for sbs. of
the weak declension, where the A.S. suffix was _-an_. Only a few old weak
plurals survive; as _oxen_, _pesen_, peas, _asshen_ (rarely _asshes_),
_hosen_, _y[:e]n_, eyes, _foon_, foes, _toon_, toes, _been_, bees (seldom
_bees_), _fleen_, fleas. We also find _kyn_, kine, _bretheren_, (never
_brothers_), _doghtren_ and _doghtres_, _sustren_ and _sustres_. So also
_children_.
Some words, originally neuter, remain unchanged in the plural; as _deer_,
_folk_, _hors_, _neet_, _pound_, _sheep_, _swyn_; sometimes _thing_ (also
_thinges_), _yeer_ (also _yeres_). So also _winter_. A few plurals shew
mutation; as _feet_, _teeth_, _men_, _wommen_, _gees_, _mys_. _Breech_ is
really an old plural; but Chaucer has the double plural _breches_ (I 330).
_Monthe_ (B 1674) is an old genitive plural, after the numeral _twelf_. In
_wyf_, pl. _wyves_, _f_ becomes _v_. In _ship_, pl. _shippes_, the _p_ is
doubled, to shew that the vowel is short.
s. 77. SUBSTANTIVES OF FRENCH ORIGIN. Substantives of French origin take a
genitive in _-es_ or _-s_, and remain unchanged in the dat. and accusative.
The plural likewise ends in _-es_ or _-s_. The final _-e_ appears in a
large number of words, such as _face_, _grace_, &c.; but is sometimes
suppressed, even when etymologically correct, as in _fors_ for _force_,
_sours_ for _source_, _beest_ for _beste_, _host_ for _hoste_, _princess_
for _princesse_[63]. In Sir Thopas, _plas_ occurs for _place_, and _gras_
for _grace_. Cf. vol. iv. p. xxxii.
In words like _nature_, _fortune_, _science_, the final _-e_ is sounded if
the accent is on the second syllable, but is usually dropped if it falls on
the first. The same usage prevails with regard to the plural suffix _-es_.
Hence we find the plurals _fl['o]ur-es_, _['a]vent['u]r-es_ on the one
hand, and _p['i]lour-s_, _l['a]zar-s_ on the other; and _p['i]lgrimes_ is
pronounced as _pilgrims_. So also _a['u]ditours_, because the accent on
_ou_ is only secondary. _Ep['i]stell[`e]s_ (B 55) is a 'learned' form.
Words in _-nt_ usually have the plural in _-nts_, often written _-ntz_; as
_tyraunts_ or _tyrauntz_. The A.F. _z_ had the sound of _ts_. A remarkable
plural occurs in _org[`o]n_ or _org[`o][`o]n_ (cf. Lat. _organa_). Words in
_s_ remain unchanged in the gen. sing. and in the pl. Thus _Bachus_, in
Leg. 2376, is a gen. sing.; and _caas_, in A 323, is plural. The pl. of
_advocat_ is _advocats_, with mute _t_, which might be written _advocaas_;
and _condys_ (for _condyts_ with mute _t_) occurs as the pl. of _condyt_.
s. 78. ADJECTIVES. These occur both in the indefinite and in the definite
form. The latter is known by its being preceded by the definite article, or
a demonstrative or possessive pronoun, in which case it takes a final _-e_;
as _the yonge_, _his halfe_, _this ilke_. Also when used in the vocative
case, as _O strange god_, A 2373.
The indefinite form usually follows the A.S. type, and so depends upon the
etymology. Hence we find, on the one hand, _blak_, _good_, _foul_; and, on
the other, _sw[=e]te_, _gr[=e]ne_, _sh[=e]ne_, _k[=e]ne_, where the long
_e_ is due to mutation in a _jo_-stem, and the final _-e_ represents a
faint survival of that stem. So also _clene_ (with open long _e_), _dere_,
_drye_, _blythe_; and even _softe_, _swote_ (without mutation). Other
dissyllables are _fewe_, _newe_, _trewe_, _riche_, _sene_ (visible),
_narwe_ (nar.u), _stille_, _thikke_, _wilde_. _Moche_ is due to loss of _l_
in _mochel_; so, perhaps, _lyte_ for _lytel_.
Several adjectives, however, occur in Chaucer with a final _-e_ in the
indefinite form, contrary to the A.S. usage. Examples: _bare_, _fayre_,
_fresshe_, _longe_, _tame_. So also _badde_, _meke_. In some cases, the
final _-e_ may be due to old usage; thus, in B 50, we find _Of olde tyme_,
A.S. _of ealdum t[=i]man_.
The plural of monosyllabic adjectives ends in _-e_. The same is the case
with some of the pronouns and many of the cardinal numbers. Even
monosyllabic past participles, when used adjectivally, may have a plural in
_-e_, as: _with y[:e]n faste y-shette_; B 560[64]; _eres spradde_, T. iv.
1422; _bente_, T. iv. 40: indeed, we even find this plural form after the
word _weren_, as in _weren fledde_, T. i. 463; _weren whette_, T. v. 1760.
So too _y-mette_, B 1115.
But adjectives and participles of more than one syllable usually remain
unaltered in the plural.
Ordinals and monosyllabic superlatives (few in number) have final _-e_ in
the definite form; as _the firste_, _the thridde_, _the ferthe_, _the
beste_, _the laste_, _the leste_, _the moste_, _the nexte_, _the werste_
(or _worste_).
Some adjectives of French origin take the French pl. suffix _-s_; as,
_capitals_, _delitables_, _espirituels_, _temporeles_.
s. 79. COMPARATIVES. Comparatives usually end in _-er_, and remain
unaltered when definite. _Better_ is sometimes written _bettre_. We also
find the comparatives _lasse_, _lesse_, less; _worse_ or _wers_, worse;
_more_, more, greater. _Bet_, better, is properly an adverb, but is also
used as an adjective. _Mo_ is properly an adverb, but is also used as an
adjective; usually, _mo_ means 'more in number,' as distinguished from
_more_, meaning 'greater in size.' Mutation is seen in _elder_, _lenger_,
_strenger_. _For-m-er_ is due to adding _-er_ to the stem of an old
superlative, _for-m-a_.
s. 80. SUPERLATIVES. Superlatives usually end in _-est_, and remain
unaltered when definite. We also find the superlatives _first_ (def.
_firste_); _best_ (def. _beste_); _last_ (def. _laste_); _leest_ (def.
_leeste_, _leste_); _most_ (def. _moste_); _next_ (def. _nexte_); _werst_
(def. _werste_, _worste_). Mutation is seen in _eldest_, _lengest_,
_strengest_. _Ferrest_ is formed from the comp. adv. _ferre_. Note also the
forms _hind-r-est_, _upp-er-est_, _utt-er-est_, _ov-er-est_. The old
superl. _for-me_ (A.S. _for-ma_, Lat. _pri-mus_) occurs in the comp. sb.
_forme-fader_; and hence the double superl. _for-m-est_.
If an accent falls on the suffix _-est_, the def. form may take final _-e_;
but examples are rare. Yet we find _the seemlieste man_, _the uttereste
preve_, _the wofulleste wight_.
s. 81. NUMERALS. The cardinal numbers are as follows. 'One' is _[`o][`o]n_,
often _[`o][`o]_ or _[`o]_ before a consonant, whence the indef. article
_an_, a. Hence also _al ones_, altogether of one accord, C 696; _for the
nones_ = _for then ones_, for the once, for the nonce; also _aloon_, alone,
more commonly _allone_. 'Two' is _tweye_ or _tweyne_, originally the masc.
form; also _tw[=o]_, originally the fem. and neuter form. The other numbers
are _three_, _foure_, _fyf_ or _fyve_, _six_, _sevene_, _eighte_, _nyne_,
_ten_; &c. The ordinals are _firste_, _othere_ or _secounde_, _thridde_,
_ferthe_ or _fourthe_, _fifte_, _sixte_, &c. Ten Brink remarks that the
form _eightetethe_ is unauthorised, and that it should be _eightetenthe_;
but this is a mistake; see vol. v. p. 134.
s. 82. PRONOUNS. The first pers. pron. is _I_, dat. and acc. _me_; pl.
_we_; dat. and acc. _us_. For _I_, we also find the Northern _ik_, not only
in the Reves Tale, but in the compound _theek_ = _thee ik_. Also, the
Southern _ich_, rarely, both alone and in the compound _theech_ = _thee
ich_. The gen. pl. _our_ occurs in _our aller_, of us all; A 823.
The second pers. pron. is _thou_, _thow_, dat. and acc. _thee_; pl. _ye_,
dat. and acc. _you_. _Thou_ is often appended to verbs, in the form _tow_;
as in _shaltow_, _wiltow_, &c.
The third pers. pron. masc. is _he_, dat. and acc. _him_; pl. _they_, gen.
_hir_ (as in _hir aller_), dat. and acc. _hem_ (never _them_), for all
genders. The fem. form is _she_, dat. and acc. _hir_ or _hire_, also
_h[`e]re_ at the end of a line or at the caesura (see Glossary). The neut.
form is _hit_ or _it_, dat. _him_; acc. _hit_ or _it_.
s. 83. POSSESSIVES. The forms are: _myn_, _my_; _thyn_, _thy_; _his_[65]
(masc. and neut.), _hire_, _hir_, _here_ (fem.); _oure_, _our_; _youre_,
_your_; _hire_, _here_, _hir_, _her_ = their. The Northern form _thair_ is
purposely introduced in A 4172. When standing alone, we also find _oure_,
_oures_, ours; _youre_, _youres_, yours; _hires_, hers; _hirs_, theirs.
s. 84. DEMONSTRATIVES. _The_ is used for the def. article in all genders
and in both numbers. A trace of the old dat. _then_ (A.S. _dh[=a]m_) occurs
in _for the nones_ (= _for then ones_). _Atte_ = _at the_.
The demonstratives are _that_; pl. _tho_, those; and _this_, pl. _thise_.
Note that _thise_ (dhiiz) is always monosyllabic; the final _e_ merely
marks (probably) a longer vowel-sound. It is probable that, in the same
way, the form _hise_, his, used with plurals, may have meant (hiiz); the
Cambridge MS. has the curious form _hese_; but it is monosyllabic.
s. 85. INTERROGATIVES. These are: _who_, _what_; gen. _whoos_, _wh[=o]s;_
dat. _wh[=o]m_; acc. _wh[=o]m_, _what_. Also _which_; pl. _whiche_,
_which_. Also _whether_, which of the two.
s. 86. RELATIVES. _That_ is used generally; also _which_, pl. _whiche_,
_which_. _Whos_ occurs as expressing a genitive; and _whom_ for a dative;
but we never find _who_ as a nominative. We also meet with _that-he_ for
'who'; _that-his_ for 'whose'; _that-him_ for 'whom'; cf. A 2710. Also _the
which_; or, when used adjectivally, _the whiche_ (A 3923); _which that_;
_the which that_; _who that_, _what that_; _who so_, _what so_.
s. 87. OTHER PRONOMINAL FORMS. _Men_ sometimes occurs as a weakened form of
_man_, with the sense of mod. E. 'one'; and it therefore takes a singular
verb. Ex. _men smoot_, one smote, A 149; _men moot_, one must, one ought
to, A 232. _Self_ is used adjectivally, as in _Thy selve neighebour_, B
115. Hence also _myself_, _myselven_, _myselve_; _thyself_, _thyselven_,
_thyselve_; _hemself_, themselves, _hemselven_, _hemselve_. _Thilke_, a
def. form, means 'that'; we also find _this ilke_, _that ilke_; cf. A 721.
_Swich_, such; pl. _swiche_, _swich_. _Oon_, _oo_, one; _noon_, _non_,
none; _other_; _any_. _Som_, pl. _som_, _some_, _somme_; the plural is
written all three ways, but is usually monosyllabic. _Al_, _alle_, _all_; a
word causing some difficulty, being very often written _alle_, though very
seldom dissyllabic. The gen. _aller_ occurs, both alone and in compounds.
_Aught_, _ought_, _oght_; _naught_, _nought_, _noght_. _Either_, gen.
_eith(e)res_; _neither_, gen. _neith(e)res_.
For 'each,' we find _[=e]ch_ (aech), reduced to _ich_ or _y_ in the
compound _everich_, _every_; cf. _everichoon_, every one. _Many_ is used
alone; also in _many oon_, _many on_, _many a_.
s. 88. VERBS.
Verbs are distinguished as being weak or strong. In the former, the pp.
(past participle) ends in _-ed_, _-d_, or _-t_; in the latter, it ends in
_-en_ or _-e_.
A simple rule is to observe that, in weak verbs, a final _-e_ is common in
the past tense, but never ends a pp. unless it is used as a plural
adjective; conversely, in strong verbs, it is common (varying with _-en_)
in the pp., but never occurs in the pt. t. _singular_. The frequent
disregard of this usage is a great blemish in Tyrwhitt's edition of the
Canterbury Tales.
s. 89. The general formulae for the conjugation of verbs are as follows.
PRESENT TENSE. Singular: 1. _-e_; 2. _-est_, _-st_; 3. _-eth_, _-th_ (or a
contracted form). Plural: _-en_, _-n_, _-e_; for all persons. In the 3rd
pers. singular, _-eth_ is often sounded as _-th_, even when _-eth_ is fully
written. We also find contracted forms, as in A.S.; such as _rit_, rideth;
_hit_, hideth; _sit_, sitteth; _bit_, biddeth; _slit_, slideth; _writ_,
writeth; _stant_, standeth; _fint_, findeth; _et_, eateth; _set_, setteth.
In all these instances the stem or root of the verb ends in _d_ or _t_.
Besides these, we find _rist_, riseth; _worth_ for _wortheth_, becomes; and
the curious form _wryth_, writheth, T. iii. 1231. In the very same line
_Bitrent_ is short for _Bitrendeth_. In the 2 pers. sing. _-est_ is often
_-st_, even when written in full; in the pl., _-en_ may be reduced to _-n_,
as in _seyn_, say, or else to _-e_, as in _sey-e_.
PAST TENSE OF STRONG VERBS. Singular: 1. 3. no suffix; 2. _-e_,
occasionally, but usually dropped. Plural: 1. 2. 3. _-en_, _-e_.
PAST TENSE OF WEAK VERBS. Singular: 1. 3. _-ede_, _-ed_, _-de_, _-te_; 2.
_-edest_, _-dest_, _-test_. Plural: 1. 2. 3. _-eden_, _-den_, _-ten_;
_-ede_, _-de_, _-te_, also _-ed_ (occasionally).
SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD: PRESENT. Singular: 1. 2. 3. _-e_. Plural: _-en_, _-e_.
PAST (STRONG VERBS); suffixes as in the present subjunctive. PAST (WEAK
VERBS); like the past tense of the indicative; but _-st_ may be dropped in
the second pers. singular.
IMPERATIVE MOOD. Singular: 2 pers. (no suffix, usually); _-e_ (in some weak
verbs). Plural: 2 pers. _-eth_, _-th_, sometimes _-e_[66]. The rest of the
Mood is supplied from the subjunctive.
INFINITIVE: _-en_, (often) _-e_. The gerundial infinitive, preceded by the
prep, _to_, and usually expressive of purpose, has a special form only in a
very few instances, as _to bene_, to be; _to done_, to do; _to sene_, to
see, A 1035; _to seyne_, to say; for which _to doon_, _to seen_ or _to
see_, _to seyn_ or _to seye_, also occur. In other verbs, it does not
differ from the ordinary infinitive. The true infinitive occurs without the
prep. _to_, and remains in mod. E. in such expressions as _I can sing_, _I
might go_.
PARTICIPLES. Present: _-inge_, _-ing_. The fuller form in _-inge_ is rare,
being chiefly employed, for the rime, at the end of a line, as
_gliteringe_, A 2890; _thunderinge_, A 2174; _flikeringe_, A 1962.
NOTE. The pres. part. is not to be confounded with the sb. of verbal
origin. Thus _singinge_, _floytinge_ (A 91), _whistling_ (A 170), are
present participles; but _priking_, _hunting_ (A 191), _winning_ (A 275),
_lerninge_ (A 300), _teching_ (A 518) are substantives. The pl. sb.
_rekeninges_ occurs in A 760.
PAST PARTICIPLES. The pp. of weak verbs ends in _-ed_, _-d_, or _-t_; and
that of strong verbs in _-en_, _-n_, _-e_. The prefix _y-_ (i),
representing the A.S. _ge-_ (_ye-_), often occurs with past participles; as
in _y-ronne_, A 8, from A.S. _gerunnen_. The same prefix occurs, very
rarely, before an infinitive; as in _y-finde_, _y-here_, _y-knowe_,
_y-see_, _y-thee_. It also appears in the adj. _y-sene_ (A.S. _ges[=e]ne_),
which has often been mistaken for a pp. But the pp. of _see_ is _y-seyn_ or
_y-seye_.
s. 90. SEVEN CONJUGATIONS OF STRONG VERBS. Strong verbs usually exhibit a
vowel-change (gradation) in the stem, as in the mod. E. _sing_, _sang_,
_sung_.
There are seven conjugations, corresponding to the types of the verbs
_drive_, _choose_, _drink_, _bear_, _give_, _shake_, _fall_. See Sievers,
A.S. Grammar.
The 'principal parts' of strong verbs are (_a_) the infinitive (which has
the primary grade); (_b_) the past tense singular (which has the middle
grade); (_c_) the past tense plural (which in A.S. usually differs, as to
its vowel, from the singular); and (_d_) the pp. In strict grammar, the 2
p. s. of the pt. t. has the same vowel as the pp. Thus _biginne_ has the
pp. _bigonnen_, and the 2 p. s. pt. t. is _bigonne_, thou didst begin,
without any final _-st_.
1. Infin. _dryven_ (driiv[*e]n); Pt. s. _dr[`o][`o]f_, _dr[`o]f_ (draof);
Pt. pl. _driven_ (driv[*e]n); Pp. _driven_ (driv[*e]n).
Thus the characteristic vowels are: _y_ (ii); _[`o][`o]_ (ao); _i_; _i_. So
are conjugated _abyden_ or _abyde_, _agryse_, _aryse_, _byde_, _byte_,
_glyde_, _ryde_, _ryse_, _ryve_, _shyne_, _shryve_, _slyde_, _smyte_,
_(be)stryde_, _stryke_, _thryve_, _wryte_, _wrythe_[67]. Chaucer also
treats _stryve_ as a strong verb, though it was originally weak; with pt.
t. _str[`o][`o]f_, pp. _striven_. To this conjugation belongs _wryen_, to
hide, put for _wr[=i]hen_; hence the pp. would be _wr[)i]h-en_, which
appears in Chaucer as _wryen_.
2. Infin. _ch[=e]sen_ (cheez[*e]n); Pt. s. _ch[`e][`e]s_ (chaes); Pt. pl.
_ch[=o]sen_ (chao.z[*e]n); Pp. _ch[=o]sen_ (chao.z[*e]n).
Here the vowel of the pp. has been lengthened, and the vowel of the pt. pl.
assimilated to that of the pp. So are conjugated: _b[=e]den_, to offer;
_brewen_ or _brewe_ (pt. t. _brew_), _cleve_, to slit, _crepe_, _flee_ (pt.
t. _fleigh_, _fley_), _flete_, to float, _flye_, to fly (pt. t. _fleigh_,
_fley_, pl. and pp. _flowen_), _lese_, to lose (pp. _loren_, _lorn_),
_lye_, to tell lies, _sethe_, to boil (pt. t. _s[`e][`e]th_, pp.
_s[)o]den_), _shete_, to shoot (pp. _sh[)o]ten_).
Here belong a few verbs with _ou_ (uu) in the infinitive; as _brouke_,
_shouven_, to shove (pt. t. _sh[`o][`o]f_, pp. _sh[)o]ven_). Also the pp.
_l[)o]ken_, as if from _louken_.
3. In this class there are two sets: (_a_) verbs in which the radical _e_
is preserved, as _swelle_; (_b_) those in which _e_ becomes _i_ before _m_
or _n_, as _drinke_.
(_a_) Infin. _swellen_; Pt. s. _swal_; Pt. pl. _swollen_; Pp. _swollen_. So
are conjugated: _bresten_ or _breste_, _delve_, _fighte_ (originally
_feghte_; pt. s. _faught_, pt. pl. and pp. _foughten_), _helpe_, _kerve_,
_melte_, _sterve_, _thresshe_, _yelde_, _yelpe_. Here belongs _worthen_
(originally _werthe_); the pt. t. and pp. do not occur. _Abreyde_ was also
originally a strong verb, and Chaucer twice uses the pt. t. _abrayd_ or
_abreyd_, riming with the pp. _sayd_ or _seyd_; but it was easily confused
with weak verbs that made the pt. t. in _-de_, and in all other places
appears as a weak verb. It was already obsolescent.
(_b_) Infin. _drinken_; Pt. s. _drank_[68]; Pt. pl. _dronken_
(drung.k[*e]n); Pp. _dronken_ (drung.k[*e]n).
So are conjugated: _biginnen_ or _biginne_, _binde_, _climbe_ (pt. s.
_clomb_), _finde_ (pt. s. _fond_, pt. pl. and pp. _founden_), _ginne_,
_grinde_ (pp. _grounden_), _ringe_, _renne_ ( = _rinne_), _shrinke_,
_singe_ (pt. s. _song_), _sinke_, _slinge_ (pt. _slong_), _spinne_,
_springe_ (pt. s. _sprong_), _stinge_ (pt. s. _stong_), _stinke_, _swimme_,
_swinke_, _thringe_ (pt. s. _throng_), _winde_ (pt. s. _wond_, pp.
_wounden_), _winne_, _wringe_ (pt. s. _wrong_).
4. Infin. _beren_; Pt. s. _bar_ (also _ber_, _beer_); Pt. pl. _b[=e]ren_;
Pp. _boren_, _bore_, _born_. Confused in M.E. with conj. 5. So also:
_breken_ or _breke_, _shere_, _speke_, _stele_, _tere_ (cf. pt. s.
_to-tar_), _trede_, _wreke_. Here belongs pt. s. _nam_, pp. _nomen_, as if
from an infin. _nemen_, which became _nimen_. Also _come_, pt. s. _cam_
(also _coom_), pt. pl. _camen_ (also _c[=o]men_), pp. _comen_ (kum.[*e]n).
5. Infin. _yeven_, _yeve_, and frequently _yive_; Pt. s. _yaf_; Pt. pl.
_yaven_ (more correctly _y[=e]ven_); Pp. _yeven_, and frequently _yiven_.
Here belong _eten_ or _ete_ (pt. s. _eet_, pp. _eten_), _forgete_, _gete_,
_mete_, to mete, _steke_ (pt. s. _stak_), _weve_ (pt. s. _waf_, pp.
_woven_); also _bidde_, _sitte_ (pt. s. _sat_, _seet_, pt. pl. _s[=e]ten_),
_ligge_ or _lye_ (pt. s. _lay_, pt. pl. _layen_). Here belongs _quethen_,
to say, which only appears in the pt. s. _quoth_ or _quod_. Also _seen_, to
see, pp. _y-seyn_, _y-seye_, with various forms of the pt. s., as _seigh_,
_sey_, _say_, _sy_, _saugh_, _saw_. The verbs _speke_, _trede_, _wreke_,
have gone over to conj. 4; and the same might be said of _weve_.
6. Infin. _shaken_; Pt. t. _sh['o]['o]k_; Pt. pl. _shooken_; Pp. _shaken_,
_shake_.
So also: _awake_ (pt. s. also _awaked_), _bake_, _drawe_ (pt. s. _drow_),
_fare_, _forsake_, _gnawe_ (pt. s. _gnow_), _grave_, _laughe_ (pt. s.
_lough_), _shape_, _shave_, _stande_ (pt. s. _stood_, pp. _stonden_),
_stapen_ (pp. _stapen_ in MS. E., which is more correct than _stopen_ in
other MSS.), _take_, _wake_, _wasshe_ (pt. s. _wessh_, _wissh_), _waxe_
(pt. s. _wex_, pp. _woxen_ instead of _waxen_). Here also belong _heve_
(pt. s. _heef_, _haf_); _sleen_ or _slee_, slay (pt. s. _slow_, _slough_,
pp. _slawe_, _slayn_); _swere_ (pt. s. _swoor_, pp. _sworen_, _sworn_).
Also _quake_, originally a weak verb, of which Chaucer has the pt. s.
_qu['o]['o]k_. Conversely, the pt. s. of _fare_ is weak, viz. _ferde_.
7. Infin. _fallen_; Pt. s. _fel_ (also _fil_); Pt. pl. _fellen_ (also
_fillen_); Pp. _fallen_. This conjugation originally made the pt. t. by
duplication, and the root-vowel varies. But the vowel of the pp. agrees
with that of the infinitive, and the vowel of the pt. t. is the same in the
singular and plural. Here belong _biholde_, pt. s. _bih[=e]ld_; _holde_,
pt. s. _heeld_; _honge_, _hange_, pt. s. _heeng_, _heng_; _bete_, pt. s.
_beet_; _hewe_; _lete_, _late_, pt. s. _leet_, pp. _leten_, _laten_;
_slepe_, pt. s. _sleep_; _blowe_, pt. s. _blew_; _crowe_, pt. s. _crew_;
_growe_, pt. s. _grew_; _knowe_, pt. s. _knew_; _sowe_; _throwe_, pt. s.
_threw_; _lepe_ (laep[*e], l[`e][`e]p[*e]), pt. s. _leep_ (l['e]['e]p);
_wepe_ (w['e]['e]p[*e]), pt. s. _weep_ (w['e]['e]p).
Besides _holde_, _biholde_, we also find the curious infinitives _helde_,
_behelde_.
Here belongs _hote_, to command, promise, pt. s. _heet_, _hight_ (from A.S.
_h[=e]ht_), pp. _hoten_. Closely connected with this is the form _hatte_
(A.S. _h[=a]tte_, Gothic _haitada_), with the passive sense 'is named,' or
'is called'; variant forms being _hette_, _highte_, the latter due to some
confusion with the strong pt. s. _hight_, mentioned above. Hence _hatte_,
_hette_, _highte_ were also used with the past sense 'was named' or 'was
called.' In Chaucer's time these forms and senses were much confused, so
that we actually find _hight_ with the sense 'was named'; and conversely,
_highte_ with the sense 'promised.' And further, we find the pp. _hoten_
with the sense 'called,' and the pp. _hight_ with the sense 'promised.'
See, in the Glossary, _Hote_, _Bihote_, _Bihete_, _Bihighte_.
Here also belongs _goon_, _gon_, _go_, to go; pp. _goon_, _gon_. The pt. t.
is supplied by _wente_ or _yede_.
s. 91. FORMATION OF WEAK VERBS.
In the case of weak verbs, which include a large number of verbs of
Anglo-French origin, much depends upon the form and even upon the length of
the stem. The standard suffix for the pt. t. is _-de_, and for the pp.,
_-d_; but this necessarily becomes _-te_ (pp. _-t_) after a voiceless
consonant and in some other cases, especially after _l_ and _gh_. A third
variety of form is caused by the frequent occurrence of _-e-_ before the
final _-de_ or _-d_, due, usually, to the form of the infinitive mood; and,
in long words especially, the form _-ede_ is frequently reduced to _-ed_.
This short explanation applies, practically, to all weak verbs.
INFINITIVES IN _-ien_, _-ie_. The A.S. infin. in _-ian_ became _-ien_,
_-ie_ in M.E., and was frequently reduced to _-e_. Ex. A.S. _lufian_, later
_lovien_; in Chaucer only _loven_, _love_, though a trace of the _i_
remains in the derived word _lovyere_, A 80. These are the verbs which make
the pt. t. in _-e-de_, the _-e-_ being due to the formative suffix _-i-_,
which is actually preserved in the pp. _ber-i-ed_, _her-i-ed_[69]. Hence
Chaucer uses the pt. t. _dwell-ed_, short for _dwell-e-de_; but he also
uses the syncopated form _dwel-te_, where _d_ has become _t_ after _l_. We
can only understand these weak verbs by help of the etymology, so that it
is unnecessary to enlarge upon the subject.
A form such as _lovede_ was liable to syncope, which means, practically,
that the word was frequently pronounced (luv.d[*e]) or (luv.ed); it
mattered little which was chosen. Before a vowel, the final _-e_ could
suffer elision, which reduced the form to _lov'd'_ (luvd).
This explains the scansion of many lines. Thus, in A 1196, it does not
matter whether we say (luv.d[*e]) or (luv.ed); but in A 1197, 1198, the
only possible form is (luv.d).
s. 92. THREE CLASSES OF WEAK VERBS. We may distribute the weak verbs into
three classes; the types being, respectively, _loven_, _heren_, to hear,
and _tellen_.
1. Infin. _lov-en_, _lov-e_; pt. t. _lov-[:e]de_, _lov-[:e]d_, _lov-(e)de_;
pp. _lov[:e]d_, _lov(e)d_. The pt. t. pl. sometimes adds _-n_. Past tenses
in which the full form in _-ede_ occurs are not common, on account of the
tendency to shorten the word. We find _lakk-ede_, _wedd-ede_, _ned-ede_, in
full, and the plurals _lok-eden_, _knokk-eden_, _yell-eden_; and even
_aqueynt-eden_, from a word of French origin. _Liv-eden_ in D 1877 is
really _liv'den_. The second _e_ is dropped in _ax-ed_, _folw-ed_,
_lok-ed_, _long-ed_, &c. As an example of the convenience of a double form,
observe the pt. s. _espy-ed_ riming with the pp. _all-yed_, B 3718; and the
pt. pl. subj. _espy-de_ riming with _tyde_, L. 771.
Here belong _answere_, pt. t. _answer-de_; _make_, pt. t. _mak-ed_, _ma-de_
(for _mak-e-de_), an extreme example of syncope, pp. _mak-ed_, _maad_,
_m[=a]d_; _clepe_, pt. t. _clep-ed_, _clep-te_; _pley-en_, pt. t.
_pley-de_, &c. Also some in which the stem has suffered some alteration, as
_twicche_, pt. t. _twigh-te_; _picche_, pt. t. _pigh-te_; _prike_, pt. t.
_prigh-te_; _reve_, pt. t. _ref-te_, _raf-te_, pp. _raf-t_; _clothe_, pt.
t. _cladde_, _cledde_, pp. _cloth-ed_, _clad_, and even _cled_; _syke_, to
sigh, pt. s. _syk-ed_, _sigh-te_.
NOTE. The second person of the past tense takes the suffix _-st_, as in
_lovedest_, contrary to the habit of the strong verbs. An anomalous form
occurs in _thou made_, instead of _thou madest_.
2. Pt. t. _h[=e]r-en_, _h[=e]r-e,_ to hear; Pt. s. _h[)e]r-de_, Pp.
_h[)e]r-d_. The vowel is shortened in the pt. s. and pp. before the two
consonants. Here belong verbs ending in _-an_ in A.S., which almost
invariably exhibit a mutated vowel in the infinitive mood; cf. A.S.
_sendan_, Goth, _sandjan_.
Here belong: _blende_, pt. _blente_; _f[=e]de_, pt. _fedde_; _f[=e]le_, pt.
_felte_; _fille_, pt. _filde_; _gr[=e]te_, to greet, pt. _grette_; _hente_,
pt. _hente_; _hyde_, pt. _hidde_, pp. _hid_, Kentish _hed_; _kepe_, pt.
_kepte_; _kisse_, pt. _kiste_, Kentish _keste_; _lede_, pt. _ledde_,
_ladde_; _mene_, to mean, pt. _mente_, _m[=e]te_, to meet, pt. _mette_;
_rende_, pt. _rente_; _sende_, pt. _sende_, _sente_; _sette_, pt. _sette_;
_spr[=e]de_, pt. _spradde_; _swete_, pt. _swatte_; _wende_, to go, pt.
_wente_; _w[=e]ne_, to imagine, pt. _wende_. So also, _d[=e]men_, to deem,
_s[=e]men_, to seem, which should make the pt. tenses _demde_, _semde_;
but, as these forms seemed awkward, they became _demed_, _semed_.
So also _l[=e]ve_, to leave, pt. _lefte_, _lafte_; _kythe_, to make known,
pt. _kid-de_, pp. _kid_ or _kythed_.
The old combinations _enct_, _engd_, became M.E. _eynt_, _eynd_. Hence we
have _blenche_, pt. _bleynte_; _drenche_, pt. _dreynte_; _quenche_, pt.
_queynte_; also the pp. forms _y-meynd_, _seynd_, _y-spreynd_, as if from
the infin. _menge_, _senge_, _sprenge_.
3. Infin. _tell-en_, _tell-e_; Pt. s. _tol-de_; Pp. _tol-d_.
Here _tol-de_ is for an O. Mercian _tal-de_ (A.S. _teal-de_), from a stem
TAL. The infin. shews mutation. The chief key to verbs of this class is to
remember that the pt. t. depends upon the original form of the stem, whilst
the infin. exhibits mutation; i.e. the pt. t. stem is more original than
the present. An old _ct_ becomes _ht_ in A.S., and _ght_ in M.E.
Here belong: _leye_, also _leggen_, to lay, pt. _layde_, _leyde_; _recche_,
to reck, pt. _roghte_, _roughte_; _seye_, pt. _seide_, _saide_; _s[=e]ke_,
pt. _soghte_, _soughte_; _selle_, pt. _solde_; _strecche_, pt. _straughte_.
Also _bye_, Kentish _begge_ (in the comp. _abegge_), to buy, pt. _boghte_,
_boughte_; _werche_, to work, pt. _wroghte_, _wroughte_ (by metathesis for
_worghte_). In a few words a radical _n_ has disappeared before _h_ (M.E.
_gh_) in the past tense: as in _bringe_, pt. _broghte_, _broughte_;
_thinke_, to seem, pt. _thoughte_ (thuuht[*e]); _thenke_, to think, pt.
_thoghte_, _thoughte_ (thaoht[*e], th[`o]uht[*e]).
_R[=e]che_, to reach, _t[=e]che_, to teach, properly belong to conj. 2; but
their past tenses became _raughte_, _taughte_, so that they seem to belong
here.
The preceding examples give most of the more important weak verbs; others
can be found in the Glossary.
Verbs of French origin seldom take _-ede_ in the pt. t., as in the case of
_aqueyntede_; the usual suffix is _-ed_ or _-de_, or both; as _crye_, to
cry, pt. _cry-ed_, _cry-de_; _espye_, pt. _espy-ed_, _espy-de_.
The pp. results from the pt. t. by omitting final _-e_; if the pt. t. ends
in _-ed_, the pp. coincides with it.
NOTE. Some verbs have both strong and weak forms; thus _abreyde_ has the
str. pt. t. _abrayd_, and the weak pt. t. _abrayde_. More striking examples
occur in _cr[=e]pe_, to creep, pt. _creep_, _crepte_, pp. _cropen_;
_sl[=e]pe_, to sleep, pt. t. _sleep_ and _slepte_; _wepe_, to weep, pt. t.
_weep_ and _wepte_. _Drede_, _rede_, once strong verbs, are weak in
Chaucer; pt. t. _dredde_, _dradde_, _redde_, _radde_. _Cleve_, to cleave,
has the weak pt. t. _clefte_, and the strong pp. _cloven_. _Broided_ is a
curious substitution for _broiden_, the true pp. of _breyde_ (A.S.
_bregdan_). _Werien_, to wear, is a weak verb of the 1st class; hence the
true pt. t. is _werede_, _wered_, as in Chaucer. The mod. E. _wore_ is a
new formation.
s. 93. SOME OTHER VERBS. _Haven_, _have_, _han_, to have; pt. t. _hadde_,
also _hade_; pp. _had_. A weak verb; often used as auxiliary.
_Doon_, _don_, to do. Pres. indic. 1. _do_, 2. _doost_, 3. _dooth_ or
_doth_; pl. _doon_, _don_. Pres. subj. _do_; pl. _doon_, _don_. Imper.
_do_; pl. _dooth_, _doth_. Pp. _doon_, _don_. Pt. t. _dide_ (weak). Gerund,
_to done_.
_Goon_, _gon_, _go_, to go. Pres. indic. 1. _go_, 2. _goost_ or _g[=o]st_,
3. _gooth_ or _g[=o]th_, also _geeth_ and _gas_ (Northern); pl. _goon_,
_gon_, _go_. Imper. _go_; pl. _gooth_. Pp. _goon_, _gon_, _go_; also _geen_
(Northern). The pt. t. is supplied by _yede_ or _wente_.
_Wol_, I will. Pres. indic. 1. _wol_ (_wil_, also written _wole_); 2.
_wolt_, _wilt_; 3. _wol_ (also written _wole_), _wil_; pl. _wollen_,
_woln_, _wole_, _wol_. Pt. _wolde_. Pp. _wold_.
THE VERB SUBSTANTIVE. Infin. _been_, _ben_, _be_. Pres. indic. 1. _am_[70],
2. _art_, 3. _is_; pl. _been_, _ben_, _be_, _beth_, rarely _aren_, _are_.
Pres. subj. _be_; pl. _been_, _be_. Imp. _be_; pl. _beeth_, _beth_. Pp.
_been_, _ben_, _be_. Gerund, _to bene_. Pt. t. 1. _was_, 2. _were_, 3.
_was_; pl. _weren_, _were_, _wer_. Pt. t. subj.; _were_; pl. _weren_,
_were_.
ANOMALOUS VERBS (Praeterito-praesentia).
CAN. Pres. indic. 1. _can_, 2. _canst_, 3. _can_; pl. _connen_, _conne_,
sometimes _can_. Pres. subj. _conne_; pl. _connen_, _conne_. Infin.
_conne_. Pt. t. _coude_, _couthe_, could, knew. Pp. _coud_, _couth_.
DAR. Pres. indic. 1. _dar_, 2. _darst_, 3. _dar_; pl. _dar_. Pt. t.
_dorste_, _durste_. Gerund, _to durre_.
MAY. Pres. indic. 1. _may_, 2. _mayst_, 3. _may_; pl. _mowen_, _mowe_.
Pres. subj. _mowe_, _mow_. Pt. t. _mighte_. Infin. _mowen_.
MOOT. Pres. indic. 1. _moot_ (_m[=o]t_), 2. _most_, 3. _moot_ (_m[=o]t_);
pl. _moten_, _mote_. Pres. subj. _mote_ (but often written _moot_ or
_mot_). Pt. t. _moste_.
OW. Pres. indic. 1. _ow_ (?), 2. _owest_, 3. _oweth_; pl. _owen_. Pt. t.
_oghte_, _oughte_.
SHAL. Pres. indic. 1. _shal_, 2. _shalt_, 3. _shal_; pl. _shullen_,
_shuln_, _shul_ (or _shal_). Pt. t. _sholde_, _shulde_.
THAR. Pres. indic. _thar_, impersonal. Pt. t. _thurfte_, _hurte_,
impersonal.
WOOT. Pres. indic. 1. _w[`o][`o]t_ (_wot_), 2. _w[`o][`o]st_ (_wost_), 3.
_w[`o][`o]t_ (_wot_); pl. _witen_, _wite_, also _woot_ (incorrectly). Pres.
subj. _wite_. Infin. _witen_, _wite_; also _weten_. Pt. t. _wiste_. Pp.
_wist_.
s. 94. NEGATIVE FORMS. _Ne_, not, is prefixed to some verbal forms, and
coalesces with them.
Ex. _nam_, for _ne am_; _nart_, for _ne art_; _nis_, for _ne is_; _nas_,
for _ne was_; _nere_, for _ne were_. _Nadde_, ne hadde; _nadstow_, ne
haddest thou; _nath_, ne hath. _Nil_, ne wil; _niltow_, ne wilt thou;
_nolde_, ne wolde. _Noot_, ne woot; _niste_, ne wiste. We even find
_nacheveth_ written for _ne acheveth_; &c. Cf. _nof_, for _ne of_; _nin_
for _ne in_.
s. 95. ADVERBS.
Some adverbs are formed by adding _-e_ to the adjectival form; as
_d[=e]p-e_, deeply, from _deep_, A 129; _loud-e_, loudly, from _loud_, A
714. Hence, beside the usual forms _heer_, here, _ther_, there, _wher_,
where, _eek_, eke, we find the anomalous forms _her-e_, _ther-e_, _wher-e_,
_ek-e_; which we should hardly expect. So also _moste_, E 1714, F 1622, as
well as _most_; probably because the word _the_ precedes, which suggested
the definite adjectival form, though the word is really used adverbially.
Other double forms are _thanne_, _than_, then; _whanne_, _whan_, when.
Amongst other forms in _-e_ may be mentioned: _asyde_, _atwinne_,
_bihinde_, _bisyde_, _bothe_, _nouthe_, _ofte_, _selde_, _sone_. Remarkable
forms are _ther-fore_, _wher-fore_ (see Stratmann). Some forms result from
loss of _n_, as _aboute_ from _abouten_; so also _above_, _bifore_ (also
_biforn_), _henne_, _inne_, _withoute_; cf. _binethen_, _sithen_.
Many adverbs are characterised by the suffix _-es_; as _agates_, _amiddes_,
_amonges_, _bisydes_, _bitymes_, _elles_, _nedes_, _togidres_, _unnethes_.
So also _hennes_, _thennes_, _whennes_; _ones_, _twyes_, _thryes_. The gen.
suffix _-es_ appears clearly in _his thankes_, A 1626.
Some adverbs have an internal _-e-_, which is not found in A.S., as in
_bold-e-ly_, A.S. _bealdl[=i]ce_; and this _-e-_ counts as a syllable. So
also _nedely_, D 968 (but _n[=e]d(e)l['y]_ in B 4434); _softely_, E 323;
_trewely_, A 773. So also _semely_, _rudeliche_.
Other noteworthy adverbs are: _bet_, better; _fer_, far, comparative
_ferre_; _negh_, nigh, _neer_, _ner_, nearer; _leng_, _lenger_, longer;
_mo_, more; _more_, more; _uppe_, up.
s. 96. PREPOSITIONS AND CONJUNCTIONS.
These are given in the Glossary. We may note the occasional use of the form
_til_ (usually Northern) for _to_, chiefly before a vowel. Also the use of
_ne ... ne_ for neither ... nor; _other ... other_, either ... or; _what
... what_, partly ... partly; _what for ... and_, both for ... and; _what
with ... and_, both by ... and.
s. 97. CONSTRUCTIONS. Amongst unusual constructions we may particularly
note the position of _with_, when used adverbially. In such a case, it is
immediately subjoined to the verb, instead of being separated from it as in
mod. E. Ex. 'to _shorte with_ your weye,' to shorten your way with, A 791;
'to helen with this hauk,' to heal this hawk with, F 641.
Another remarkable construction is seen in such a phrase as 'The kinges
meting Pharao,' the dream of king Pharaoh; see note to F 209.
At the beginning of a sentence _ther_ frequently means 'where'; it makes
all the difference to the sense.
s. 98. VERSIFICATION.
The structure of English versification has been much obscured by the use of
classical terms in senses for which they are ill-adapted, and by artificial
and wooden systems of prosody which obscure the natural pronunciation of
sentences. In order to prevent all obscurity, the terms employed shall be
carefully defined.
STRONG AND WEAK SYLLABLES. An accented syllable is _strong_, An unaccented
syllable is _weak_. A syllable that bears a secondary or a slight emphasis
is _half-strong_. A very weak or slightly pronounced syllable is _light_.
Examples. In the words _light_, _alight_, _lighter_, the syllable _light_
is, in each case, 'strong'; the syllables _a-_ and _-er_ are 'weak.'
Chaucer sometimes uses such a word as _light-e_, in which the final _-e_
may constitute a syllable of the verse, in which case it is 'weak'; or it
may be elided or nearly elided before a vowel, in which case it may
conveniently be described as being 'light.' In such a word as
_c['o]nquer[`o]r_, there are really two accents. The true 'strong' accent
is now on the first syllable; the 'half-strong' or secondary accent is on
the third syllable; and it is not unusual to denote this by the use of an
acute accent for the strong, and grave accent for the half-strong syllable.
s. 99. THREE LATIN TERMS. A word such as _alight_ is often described as
constituting an 'iambus' or 'iamb'; and I shall sometimes here use this
term, but under protest. An iambus is properly a short syllable followed by
a long one; whereas the English iamb is a weak syllable followed by a
strong one, which is a very different thing. The confusion between _length_
in Latin verses and _strength_ in English verses is pernicious, and has
greatly misled many writers on metre; for the difference between them is
fundamental.
In the same way, such a word as _lighter_ may be called a 'trochee'; but it
must never be forgotten that, in English poetry, it means a strong syllable
followed by a weak one, and is independent of the notion of 'length.'
Similarly, such a word as _alighted_, in which a strong syllable is
situated between two weak ones, may be called an 'amphibrach.' The
amphibrach plays a highly important part in English verse, though it is
usual not to mention it at all. I shall use these three terms, _iamb_,
_trochee_, and _amphibrach_, only occasionally, and for the convenience of
the names; it being now well understood that I merely mean such groups of
strong and weak syllables as occur in the English words _alight_,
_lighter_, and _alighted_.
Having thus explained that an 'iamb' has nothing to do with long and short
syllables, I shall nevertheless use, to denote it, the ordinary symbol v -.
Similarly, the symbol - v means a trochee; and the symbol v - v means an
amphibrach. It follows that v here means, not a _short_, but a _weak_
syllable; and - here means, not a _long_, but a _strong_ one. If this be
remembered, all will be clear; but not otherwise.
s. 100. I shall attempt, first, to describe the versification of the lines
in the Canterbury Tales; it will be easy to explain the shorter lines (of
four accents) afterwards.
SPEECH-WAVES. In English, accent plays a very important part; and for this
reason, we may consider English speech as consisting of a succession of
utterances which form, as it were, speech-waves, in which each wave or jet
of breath contains a strong syllable; and this strong syllable may either
stand alone, or may be preceded or followed by a weak syllable, or may even
be both preceded and followed by a weak syllable during the emission of the
same jet of breath[71].
Thus each jet of breath, due to a slight impulse emitting inhaled air, may
be denoted by -, or by v -, or by - v, or by v - v. That is, the words
_light_, _alight_, _lighted_, _alighted_ can all be produced in a single
speech-wave. But if a word has _two_ accents, it requires two impulses to
utter it, and really contains two speech-waves. Such words are extremely
common; as _c['o]nque-r[`o]r_, _am['a]l-gam[`a]te_, &c.; and many English
words require _three_ speech-waves, as _ins[`o]l-ub['i]li-t[`y]_; or even
_four_, as _[`i]n-comb[`u]sti-b['i]li-t[`y]_.
s. 101. Here comes in the distinction between prose and verse. It is
equally easy to describe the accentual structure of either; and it is
readily perceived that, in prose, the speech-waves succeed each other so
that there is, usually, no perceptible regularity in the distribution of
strong and weak syllables; but, in verse, we expect them to be distributed
in a manner sufficiently regular for the ear to recognise some law of
recurrence, and to expect it.
An extremely regular line occurs in Goldsmith's Deserted Village:--
And-f['o]ols, who-c['a]me to-sc['o]ff, rem['a]ined to-pr['a]y.
This obviously consists of five consecutive iambs, and may be denoted by: v
- . v - . v - . v - . v -. Here the dot (.) is introduced to shew precisely
where the natural pause in the voice, or the separation of the
speech-waves, occurs.
It is usual, in books of prosody, to introduce a bar instead of a dot, and
thus to break up the line into bits of equal length, and to exhibit the
result as the Procrustean formula to which all lines of five accents should
be reduced. There is little to be learnt from this wooden method, which
amounts to little more than leaving the reader to find out the scansion for
himself as he best may; for few lines really conform to it.
If, bidding adieu to this artificial system, we inquire into the way in
which a good reader really articulates the lines, we find that he,
following the poet, is so far from conforming to this uniform type of line,
that he usually does his best to avoid it; and the more skilfully he does
this, the more he is appreciated for his variety. Indeed, the number of
possible variations is considerable, as Goldsmith may again teach us, if,
instead of using a bar to denote the _artificial_ pause, we use a dot to
denote the _natural_ and the _actual_ one. Good examples occur in the
following lines, all different in their effect. Observe that the hyphen is
used to bring together words that are pronounced in a single speech-wave;
for just as _c['o]nque.r['o]r_ requires _two_ jets of breath, it often
happens that two words (one of them enclitic) can be uttered in _one_.
How-['o]ften . h['a]ve-I . pa['u]s'd . on-['e]v'ry . ch['a]rm,
The-sh['e]lter'd . cot . the-c['u]lti.v[`a]ted . f['a]rm,
The-n['e]ver . fa['i]ling . br['o]ok . the-b['u]sy . m['i]ll.
These may be analysed as below.
v - v . - v . - . v - v . -
v - v . - . v - v . - v . -
v - v . - v . - . v - v . -
These three lines are obviously different, and all differ from the line
already quoted.
If, however, we now remove the dots, all four lines can be included in the
same formula: v - v - v - v - v -. And this is what is really meant (or
ought to be meant) by saying that Goldsmith's line consists of five iambic
feet; the general type v - being called an iambic foot.
s. 102. As the use of dots, as above, is rather confusing, we might employ
the usual bars instead; assigning to them natural instead of artificial
positions. But it will be better, under the circumstances, to employ
special types. I shall use ¯¯ to denote a strong syllable, and ¯ to denote
a half-strong syllable. Then, if the weak syllable be denoted by a thin
up-stroke or down-stroke, we have |¯ to denote an iamb; ¯| for a trochee;
and |¯| for an amphibrach; and the four lines from Goldsmith may be thus
scanned[72]:--
And-fools, who-came to-scoff, remained to-pray. |¯ |¯ |¯ |¯ |¯
How-often have-I paused on-every charm, |¯| ¯| ¯¯ |¯| ¯¯
The-sheltered cot, the culti.vated farm, |¯| ¯¯ |¯| ¯| ¯¯
The never . failing brook, the-busy mill. |¯| ¯| ¯¯ |¯| ¯¯
In every case an upstroke is followed by a horizontal one, i.e. a weak
syllable by a strong one, but the general effect is variable, and is easily
caught by the eye. This method at once detects a real recurrence of a line
cast in precisely the same mould. Thus the line--'For-talking age
and-whispering lovers made' is to be scanned: |¯| ¯¯ |¯| ¯| ¯¯ and thus
closely resembles the _third_ of the above lines, being denoted by the same
formula.
s. 103. When we come to apply a similar system of scansion to Chaucer, we
find that he differs from Goldsmith in FOUR important particulars. This is
because he followed, more immediately, the rules of verse as exhibited in
the Old French metres. I quote the following from P. Toynbee's Specimens of
Old French, p. liii:--
'In ten-syllabled lines [i.e. in lines of five accents] the pause or
caesura is after the fourth syllable:--
Mors est Rollanz, | Deus en ad Panme es cielz.
At the caesura, and also at the end of the line, a feminine syllable [i.e.
a weak or light additional syllable] is admissible, which does not count,
even if it is not elided. It is thus possible to have no less than four
different forms of ten-syllabled epic lines, all equally correct; viz.
(_a_) Plurent lur filz | lur frer[:e]s, lur nevulz.
(_b_) Encuntre ter_re_ | se pasment li plusur.
(_c_) A lur chevals | unt toleit[:e]s les sel_[:e]s_.
(_d_) Cons fut de Ro_m[:e]_ | del mielz qui donc i er_[:e]t_.'
Here, in (_b_) and (_d_), there is an _additional_ syllable at the caesura
or _middle pause_; and, in (_c_) and (_d_) there is an additional syllable
at the end of the line. Hence the number of syllables is, in (_a_), _ten_;
in (_b_) and (_c_), _eleven_; and in (_d_) _twelve_. But the number of
accents is the same in all, viz. _five_. It is therefore better to speak of
these lines as containing _five accents_ than to call them _ten-syllabled_
lines.
All the above varieties are found in Chaucer; and we thus see TWO of the
particulars in which he differs from Goldsmith, viz. (1) that he sometimes
introduces an additional syllable at the end of the line; and (2) that he
does the same after the caesura, or at what may (roughly) be called the end
of the half-line.
s. 104. But the fact is that Old French verse admits of more licences than
the above. It was also permissible for the poet (besides _adding_ to the
line at the _end_) to _subtract_ from it at the _beginning_, viz. by
omitting the first weak syllable at the beginning, or the first weak
syllable in the second half-line; i.e. after the caesura. This accounts for
TWO MORE particulars of variation from the modern line of Goldsmith.
The result is that the Old French verse absolutely exhibited no less than
sixteen varieties; and the actual number of syllables varied from eight
(the least) to twelve (the greatest number). Dr. Schipper gives the true
scheme in his Englische Metrik, p. 440, as follows; where the number
_following_ each scheme expresses the number of syllables.
I. Chief forms.
1. v - v - | v - v - v - 10.
2. v - v - v | v - v - v - 11.
3. v - v - | v - v - v - v 11.
4. v - v - v | v - v - v - v 12.
II. Without the first syllable.
5. - v - | v - v - v - 9.
6. - v - v | v - v - v - 10.
7. - v - | v - v - v - v 10.
8. - v - v | v - v - v - v 11.
III. Syllable dropped after the caesura.
9. v - v - | - v - v - 9.
10. v - v - v | - v - v - 10.
11. v - v - | - v - v - v 10.
12. v - v - v | - v - v - v 11.
IV. Two syllables dropped.
13. - v - | - v - v - 8.
14. - v - v | - v - v - 9.
15. - v - | - v - v - v 9.
16. - v - v | - v - v - v 10.
s. 105. Thus Chaucer had, unquestionably, sixteen forms of verse to choose
from. It only remains to discover how many of these he actually employed.
The shortest answer is, that he freely accepted the principles of adding a
syllable at the end of the line and at the end of the half-line. He also
allowed himself to accept the principle of dropping the first syllable of
the line[73]. But he disliked forms 9, 11, 13, and 15, which introduce a
most disagreeable jerk into the middle of the line, such as he very rarely
allows[74].
s. 106. The general rules for the mode of reading Chaucer's lines have been
given above (s. 67); and need not be here repeated.
I now subjoin some examples. In each case the prefixed number refers to one
of the sixteen forms given in s. 104; whilst the symbols following the
lines give the natural method of scansion. Words joined by hyphens are
pronounced in the same jet of breath. I may also note here that a trochee
is sometimes substituted for an iamb, i.e. ¯| for |¯; especially at the
beginning of a line, or of the latter half-line. The place of the caesura
is denoted by a bar. A shorter down-stroke than usual signifies a _light_
syllable, as defined in s. 98. The following examples are from Group A of
the Canterbury Tales:--
12. Wh['a]n-that Apr['i]ll[:e] | with his-sh['o]ures s['o]te (1).
¯| |¯| . ¯ |¯| ¯|
4. The-dr['o]ght' of-M['a]rch[:e] | hath-p['e]rced t['o] the-r['o]te.
|¯ |¯' . |¯| ¯ |¯|
1. Of-wh['i]ch vert['u] | eng['e]ndred ['i]s the-fl['o]ur (4).
|¯ |¯ . |¯| ¯ |¯
3. Hath-['i]n the-R['a]m | his-h['a]lfe c['o]urs y-r['o]nne (8).
|¯ |¯ . |¯| ¯¯ |¯|
10. That-fr['o] the-t['y]me | th['a]t he-f['i]rst big['a]n (44).
|¯ |¯| . ¯ |¯ |¯
2. Whan-th['e]y were-w['o]nne | and-['i]n the-Gr['e]te S['e]e.
|¯ |¯ . |¯ |¯| ¯¯
14. ['A]l bism['o]t'red | w['i]th his-h['a]ber. ge['o]un (76).
¯¯ |¯| . ¯ |¯| ¯¯
6. Th['a]t no-dr['o]pe | ne-f['i]ll' up['o]n hir-br['e]st (131).
¯ |¯' . |¯ |¯ |¯
7. G['i]nglen ['i]n | a-wh['i]stling w['i]nd as-cl['e]re[75] (170).
¯| ¯ . |¯| ¯¯ |¯|
16. F['o]r to-d['e]len | w['i]th no-sw['i]ch por['a]ille (247).
¯¯ |¯| . ¯ |¯ |¯|
5. N['o][:e]s fl['o]od | com'-w['a]lwing ['a]s the-s['e]e (3616).
¯| ¯¯ . |¯| ¯ |¯
We have here examples of many of the above forms, viz. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,
10, 12, 14, 16; sufficient to shew Chaucer's general conformity with his
French models.
s. 107. But a very superficial examination of Chaucer's verse soon shews
that he continually sets aside the rigid rule of the Old French prosody
that regulated the position of the medial pause. His study of Italian soon
shewed him a better way; for there is a great tendency to monotony in the
French mode. Dante frequently includes _three_ accents in the former part
of his line, which gives much greater freedom to the verse. Thus l. 14 of
the Divina Commedia is as follows:--
L[`a]-ove terminava | quella valle. |¯| ¯| ¯| . ¯| ¯|
Consequently, we must allow the bar denoting the caesura to shift its
position to a later place in the line, as in A 3; though we may still use
Dr. Schipper's number, as above, to denote the general type of the line.
That is, A 3 becomes:--
Cf. 2. And-b['a]thed ['e]v'ry v['e]yn[:e] | in-sw['i]ch lic['o]ur.
|¯| ¯| ¯| . |¯ |¯
But this is not the only variety; for the mark denoting the caesura is
actually inserted in the Ellesmere MS. with much care, and is seldom
misplaced. This shews that some lines are divided much more unequally; so
that, in fact, the former portion of the line may contain _one_ accent
only, or it may contain _four_; in addition to the above instances in which
it contains _two_ or _three_. I give examples from the Cant. Tales, Group
A:--
12. And-sh['o]rtly | wh['a]n the-s['o]nne w['a]s to-r['e]ste (30).
|¯ . ¯¯ |¯| ¯¯ |¯|
10. And-['a]fter | ['a]mor u['i]ncit ['o]mni.['a] (162).
|¯| . ¯| ¯| ¯| ¯¯
3. And th['u]s | with-f['e]yned fl['a]te.r['y]' and-j['a]pes (705).
|¯ . |¯| ¯| ¯¯ |¯|
3. Arc['i]t' is-h['u]rt as-m['u]ch' as-h['e] | or-m['o]re (1116).
|¯ |¯ |¯ |¯ . |¯|
In some places the Ellesmere MS. marks _two_ pauses in a line, but we need
only consider one of them as constituting the true caesura. Thus, in A 923,
there is a mark after _been_ and another after _duchesse_; the latter may
be considered as subsidiary.
The occurrence of initial portions of a line containing _one_ accent or
_four_ is comparatively rare; but the inclusion of _three_ accents is very
common.
s. 108. The addition of a weak syllable at the end of a line is easily
explained. It is because, at this point, the poet is FREE; that is, the
pause that naturally occurs there enables him to insert an additional
syllable with ease. Shakespeare did not hesitate even to add _two_
syllables there, if he was so minded; as in Rich. III. iii. 6.
9:--'Untainted, unexamin'd, free, at liberty.'
For a like reason, the medial pause likewise gives him freedom, and enables
an additional syllable to be inserted with comparative ease. We may believe
that, in old times, when poetry was recited by minstrels to large
assemblies, the enunciation of it was slow and deliberate, and the pauses
were longer than when we now read it to a friend or to ourselves. The
importance attached to suffixes denoting inflexions tends to prove this.
The minstrel's first business was to be understood. Many speakers speak too
fast, and make too short pauses, till experience teaches them better.
Hence there is _no need_ to elide a vowel at the caesura; it must therefore
be sounded clearly. In A 2, the final _-e_ in _March-e_ should be fully
pronounced.
The fact is made much clearer by observing such instances as the following,
all from the Cant. Tales, Group B:--
Or-['e]lles c['e]rt[:e]s | ye b['e]en to d['a]un.ger[`o]us (2129).
|¯| ¯| . |¯ |¯ |¯
Which-th['a]t my-f['a]der | in-h['i]s prosp['e]r.it['e]e (3385).
|¯ |¯| . |¯ |¯ |¯
That-g['o]d of-h['e]ven | had d['o]m.in['a].ci['o]un (3409).
|¯ |¯| . |¯ |¯ |¯
To-M['e]des [`a]nd to-P['e]rses y['e]ven | quod-h['e] (3425).
|¯| ¯ |¯| ¯| . |¯
O['u]t-of his-d['o]r[:e]s | an['o]n he-h['a]th him-d['i]ght (3719).
¯| |¯| . |¯ |¯ |¯
In the same way, the inflexional final _-e_ should be fully sounded in
Group B, l. 102:--
If-th['o]u noon-['a]sk[:e] | with-n['e]d' art['o]w so-w['o]unded.
|¯ |¯| . |¯ |¯ |¯|
So also in B 1178:--
N['a]y-by my-f['a]der s['o]ul[:e] | that-sh['a]l he-n['a]t.
¯| |¯| ¯| . |¯ |¯
Similar examples abound. Thus we should fully pronounce _length-e_, B 8;
_declar-e_, B 1672; _loud-e_, B 1803; _thought-e_, B 1852; _fynd-e_, B
3112; _raft-e_, B 3288; _hadd-e_, B 3309; _biraft-e_, B 3404; _son-e_, B
3413; _son-e_, B 3593; _shet-te_, B 3615; _wend-e_, B 3637.
Notice some examples where the caesura necessarily preserves a final _-e_
from elision, as in B 3989; where _tal-e_ occurs before _al_. So also
_ensamp-le_ in B 3281. Similar instances are rather numerous.
s. 109. The student who has followed the explanation of Chaucer's scansion
up to this point is now in a position to understand the whole mystery of
additional syllables in other positions. According to the usual method of
cutting up lines into 'feet,' such additional syllables make the line seem
awkward; whereas, if properly handled, they are very acceptable.
Thus the line B 3385 used to be cut up after the following fashion--Which
that | my fa | der in his | prosper | itee; and the third foot was called
trisyllabic. Yet the truth is, that the syllable _-der_ in _fader_ really
belongs to the former part of the line (for we cannot pause after _fa-_),
and therefore belongs to the 'second foot'; and it would have been better
to cut up the line accordingly. But the whole system of chopping up into
imaginary equal lengths is inefficient and clumsy; and we have only to
adopt a natural accentuation. Thus, in B 3368 (just below), the final _-y_
in _many_ causes no real difficulty, though it adds a syllable to the
line:--
And-y['a]f him-w['i]t | and-th['a]n with-m['a]ny a-t['e]re.
|¯ |¯ . |¯ |¯' |¯|
So again, in B 3105, the final _-es_ in _ell-es_ is easily sounded:--
Or-['e]ll[:e]s I-['a]m but-l['o]st | but-['i]f that-I.
|¯' |¯ |¯ . |¯ |¯
Compare Sir Thopas, B 2097:--
And-th['e]r-in st['i]ked | a-l['i]ly fl['o]ur.
|¯| ¯| . |¯| ¯¯
The poet's chief business, in such a case, is to see to it, that the
syllable thus inserted shall be a light one, in order to prevent the line
from becoming clogged. Chaucer is very particular about this; and we shall
find that he almost invariably employs, in such a position, such light
syllables as these; viz. _-e_ before a consonant, and _-ed_, _-el_, _-en_,
_-er_, _-es_, often before a vowel. This is a matter which requires a good
ear and skilful care; which he certainly possessed. Even at the caesura, it
will be found that he usually inserts only light syllables of this
character, and the effect is extremely good. A beautiful example occurs in
A 2144:--
As-['a]ny r['a]v'nes f['e]ther | it-sh['o]on for-bl['a]k.
|¯| ¯| ¯' . |¯ |¯
We may also compare B 1659:--
Thou-r['a]vi.sed[`e]st | doun-fr['o] the-d['e].it['e]e.
|¯' |¯ . |¯ |¯ |¯
Also D 334:--
A-m['a]n to-l['i]ght' his-c['a]ndle | at-h['i]s lant['e]rne.
|¯ |¯ |¯' . |¯ |¯|
s. 110. We have now to consider the possibility, that Chaucer sometimes
dropped the initial syllable of the _latter_ part of a line, after the
caesura; a licence of which Lydgate availed himself to a painful extent. It
is clear that his ear disliked it; yet there seem to be just a few cases
that cannot fairly be explained away, the MSS. being sadly unanimous. It is
better to learn the truth than to suppress what we should ourselves
dislike. One example occurs in E 1682:--
My-t['a]l is-d['o]on | f['o]r my-w['i]t is-th['i]nne
|¯ |¯ . ¯ |¯ |¯|
The two worst MSS. alter _doon_ to _don-e_, which is impossible. The rest
agree.
Another occurs in B 2141:--
I-m['e]n' of-M['a]rk | M['a]thew, L['u]k, and-I['o]hn.
|¯ |¯ . ¯| ¯¯ |¯
Four MSS. have a tag after the _k_ in _Mark_; hence I have printed
_Mark-e_. But I fear it can hardly be justified.
Lines B 3384, 3535 are unsatisfactory. Line E 2240, which is obviously
incomplete, is easily mended.
s. 111. ACCENTUATION. The above sections explain most of the more difficult
points in the scansion of Chaucer, and should enable the student to scan
most of the lines. But it is necessary to add a few words as regards his
system of accentuation, elision, cont
Showing first 200,000 characters. Full text: gutenberg.org/ebooks/43097