A Brief History of the English Language and Literature, Vol. 2Meiklejohn, J. M. D. (John Miller Dow)
Philosophy
A Brief History of the English Language and Literature, Vol. 2
Meiklejohn, J. M. D. (John Miller Dow)
English language -- History; English literature -- History and criticism
Here it is the spelling of Langlande’s English that differs most from
modern English, and not the grammar. --Much the same may be said of the
style of Wycliffe (1324-1384) and of Mandeville (1300-1372). In
Wycliffe’s version of the Gospel of Mark, v. 26, he speaks of a woman
“that hadde suffride many thingis of ful many lechis (doctors), and
spendid alle hir thingis; and no-thing profitide.” Sir John Mandeville’s
English keeps many old inflexions and spellings; but is, in other
respects, modern enough. Speaking of Mahomet, he says: “And ȝee schulle
understonds that Machamete was born in Arabye, that was first a pore
knave that kept cameles, that wenten with marchantes for marchandise.”
_Knave_ for boy, and _wenten_ for went are the two chief differences--
the one in the use of words, the other in grammar-- that distinguish
this piece of Mandeville’s English from our modern speech.
10. +The English of the Sixteenth Century.+-- This, which is also called
Tudor-English, differs as regards grammar hardly at all from the English
of the nineteenth century. This becomes plain from a passage from one of
Latimer’s sermons (1490-1555), “a book which gives a faithful picture of
the manners, thoughts, and events of the period.” “My father,” he
writes, “was a yeoman, and had no lands of his own, only he had a farm
of three or four pound a year at the uttermost, and hereupon he tilled
so much as kept half a dozen men. He had walk for a hundred sheep; and
my mother milked thirty kine.” In this passage, it is only the
old-fashionedness, homeliness, and quaintness of the English-- not its
grammar-- that makes us feel that it was not written in our own times.
When Ridley, the fellow-martyr of Latimer, stood at the stake, he said,
“I commit our cause to Almighty God, which shall indifferently judge
all.” Here he used _indifferently_ in the sense of _impartially_-- that
is, in the sense of _making no difference between parties_; and this is
one among a very large number of instances of Latin words, when they had
not been long in our language, still retaining the older Latin meaning.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account