The final _e_ is ignored, before a consonant, in _were_ (59, 68, 74, 81); and even, which is not common, in _hope_ (88) and _nose_ (152). As examples of accents to which we are no longer accustomed, we may notice _A-príl-le_ (1); _ver-tú_ (4); _cor-á-ges_ (11); _á-ven-túre_ (25); _tó-ward_ (27); _re-sóun_ (37); _hon-óur_ (46); _hon-óur-ed_ (50); _a-ry´-ve_ (60); _sta-tú-re_ (83); _Cur-téys_ (99). The lines were recited deliberately, with a distinct pause near the middle of each, at which no elision could take place. At this medial pause there is often a redundant syllable (as is more fully explained in vol. vi). Thus, in l. 3, the _-e_ in _veyn-e_ should be preserved, though modern readers are sure to ignore it. Cf. _carie_ in l. 130; _studie_ in l. 184; &c. § 22. By help of the above hints, some notion of the melody of Chaucer may be gained, even by such as adopt the modern English pronunciation. It is right, however, to bear in mind that most of the vowels had, at that time, much the same powers as in modern French and Italian; and it sometimes makes a [xxv] considerable difference. Thus the word _charitable_ in l. 143 was really pronounced more like the modern French _charitable_; only that the initial sound was that of the O. F. and E. _ch_, as in _church_, not that of the modern French _ch_ in _cher_. For further remarks on the pronunciation, see vol. vi. § 23. The feeble suggestion is sometimes made that Chaucer's spelling ought to be modernised, like that of Shakespeare. This betrays a total ignorance of the history of English spelling. It is not strictly the case, that Shakespeare's spelling has been modernised; for the fact is the other way, viz. that in all that is most essential, it is the spelling of Shakespeare's time that has been adopted in modern English. The so-called 'modern' spelling is really a survival, and is sadly unfit, as we all know to our cost, for representing modern English sounds. By 'modernising,' such critics usually mean the cutting off of final _e_ in places where it was just as little required in Elizabethan English as it is now; the freër use of 'v' and of 'j'; and so forth; nearly all of the alterations referring to unessential details. Such alterations would have been useful even in Shakespeare's time, and would not have touched the character of the spelling. But the spelling of Chaucer's time refers to quite a different age, when a large number of inflections were still in use that have since been discarded; so that it involves changes in essential and vital points. As it happens, the spelling of the Ellesmere MS. is phonetic in a very high degree. Pronounce the words _as they are spelt_, but with the Italian vowel-sounds and the German final _e_, and you come very near the truth. If this is too much trouble, pronounce the words _as they are spelt_, with modern English vowels (usually adding a final _e_, pronounced like _a_ in _China_, when it is visibly present); and, even so, it is easy to follow.