History of the English language

Preface To The Revised Edition

A revised edition of this work has long been desirable on many accounts ; it has now become indispensable for reasons purely typographical. The plates from which the previous impressions have been printed are now thoroughly worn out. The present seemed, therefore, a fitting time to subject the work to a complete revision in the light of changes which experience has shown to be advisable, and of modifications and alterations of statement which the advance of knowledge has rendered necessary.

This revision has been carried out on so extensive a scale, and so numerous have been the alterations, that, while the old lines have been followed, the work, as a whole, has almost a right to be termed new. There are comparatively few paragraphs which have not been entirely or partially rewritten. Facts have been restated and passages have been rearranged. Matter found in the previous editions has been discarded, and new matter, which seemed more pertinent, has been substituted in its place. Yet, in spite

iii iv Preface to the Revised Edition.

of the large number of omissions, so much has been added that the present edition contains above one hundred and fifty pages more than those that have preceded it. There are many other changes which, it is hoped, will conduce to an easier and fuller comprehension of the subject. Certain points which, as experience has proved, were liable to be misapprehended or overlooked by the reader or student, have been brought out more clearly and prominently. A system of cross-references between the two parts and between the different sections of the second part has been carried through on a somewhat extended scale. A large number of illustrative references and quotations have been added. In the limited field, in fact, which the work sets out to cover, no pains have been spared to make it as complete as possible.

The greatest difference, in any single case, between this and the previous editions is in the treatment of the strong verbs in the second part. Still the more important of the changes introduced were introduced on the score of expediency. In this country Sievers's Angels achsische Gra7nmatik, or the Sievers-Cook " Old English Grammar," is the grammar of our earliest speech which is now in widest use. It was therefore deemed better to conform the classification of the strong verbs to that employed in those works, and to bring it in accord with them, a change was made in the number and arrangement previously adopted. In addition, the details belonging to the different classes of strong verbs have been largely brought

Preface to the Revised Edition. v

together in this edition under each class, and not, as before, distributed under different titles.

As regards the subject of nomenclature, I have seen no reason to alter essentially that which was employed in the previous editions. On one point in particular, action has not been taken unadvisedly. I have examined with care everything accessible on the subject, and, I think, nearly everything that has been published, and the more I have read, the less I have been impressed with the force of the arguments against the use of the term " Anglo-Saxon." I have therefore retained it in this work, as furnishing what is all-important in nomenclature, a term which, once understood, can never be misunderstood. It is very noticeable that those who are most violently opposed to its use, not unfrequently resort to it when they wish to define with absolute precision what they mean when they apply the term " Old English " to a particular period in the history of the language. There are, indeed, advantages and disadvantages connected with any terminology that may be adopted. It is certainly an argument in favor of the designation as Old English of what is here called Anglo-Saxon, that it makes prominent the continuity of our speech. It is an objection to it that, besides the inevitable ambiguity of the epithet ' old,' it suggests wrong ideas as to the nature of that continuity. Still it would be folly to attach importance to this particular subject. It is only those who magnify matters of minor consequence that will consider the question as one of much moment. I have, vi Preface to the Revised Edition.

accordingly, taken pains to furnish the student with a precise account of that other one of the numerous terminologies proposed or used, which is now preferred by many.

It is hardly necessary to be observed that this work does not set out to be a treatise on usage. Yet it is inevitable that many questions connected with that subject should come up constantly in a description of the history of inflection. Hence a place is necessarily found in these pages for the explanation of the origin of various and varying peculiarities of expression, as, for instance, that of double plurals of the nouns like folk and folks, memorandums and memoranda; of participial forms like gotten and got, proved and proven; of phrases and constructions such as it is me, you was, he dare, between you and I, the house is being built, and, in fine, of a long list of locutions, the propriety of which is made a matter of constant contention.

So far, in truth, as regards one particular branch of usage, this work may be fairly called complete. There are no anomalous grammatical forms belonging to the speech which are not here recorded, with an account given of their origin. The exact history of these will answer decisively numerous questions of disputed usage which can be answered in no other way. In order to have the work as serviceable as possible in this particular, the indexes have been made exceedingly full, wherever points of this kind are concerned.

At the same time, in tracing the history of these

Preface to the Revised Edition. vii

disputed forms and phrases, I have not attempted to lay down what in my opinion ought to be, but simply to point out what is, and how it came to be what it is. My aim has been to furnish a trustworthy guide, to which any one in doubt about the propriety of a particular form can go, with the assurance that he can find accurate and definite information that will enable him to comprehend clearly the arguments for and against its use, and will put him in a position to settle for himself in any given instance on which side the weight of authority lies. On certain points, indeed, the evidence is so entirely one-sided that no course is open save to pronounce an opinion in accordance with it. But this is rarely the fact. Usually the evidence is conflicting, and in such instances the most that can safely be said, in summing up, is that the present tendency of the language is to prefer one of two disputed forms or expressions — which is something quite different, however, from saying that the other form or expression is wrong. A scientific treatise has no business to set up as a standard of authority the preferences of particular persons : and in this matter diligent effort has been put forth to separate the facts of language from the fancies, the prejudices, and the theories of individuals, including those of the author himself.

It it perhaps desirable, even if not absolutely necessary, to repeat the statement made in the preface to the previous editions, that the division of the history into two parts has involved in some instances viii Preface to the Revised Edition.

the necessity of going over the same ground. In no case, however, will this be found to be mere repetition. And, while the second part has been more particularly prepared for the special student, it is hoped that there is nothing in it which will present any difficulty to any reader of ordinary intelligence who cares to investigate the subject.

In conclusion, in expressing my obligations to many who have aided me in the revision of this work, I am bound to acknowledge my special indebtedness to my colleague, Prof. Albert S. Cook, who in all cases of doubt and difficulty, especially in connection with the earliest period of the speech, has invariably given me the benefit of his intimate acquaintance with the language of that time. From many others, too numerous to be mentioned by name, I have received help in this revision, either in the way of suggestion, or of criticism. There is, in truth, nothing more encouraging for the future of English scholarship in this country than the existence of so many enthusiastic students of our early language and literature, who are engaged in making special investigations of their own, and who never fail to communicate to those under their instruction a portion of their own zeal. I can ask no better fortune for the revised edition of this work, than that to some slight extent it may be as helpful to them as the results of their labors have often been to me.

T. R. Lounsbury.

New Haven, Jan. 15, 1894.

CONTENTS,

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.

LANGUAGES ALLIED TO THE ENGLISH.

PAGE

The Indo-European or Aryan Family of Languages. — I. The Indian Branch. — II. The Iranian Branch. — III. The Hellenic Branch. — IV. The Slavonic or Slavo- Lettic Branch. — V. The Celtic Branch. — VI. The Italic Branch. — VII. The Teutonic Branch. — The Semitic Family ........ I

Chapter I. The Roman And The Teutonic Conquest Of Britain

The Roman Conquest. — The Teutonic Conquest. — Names of the Teutonic Invading Tribes, and Kingdoms founded by them. — Rise of the Kingdom of Wessex . . 17

ix x Contents.

Chapter II. The Anglo-saxon Language And Literature

PAGE

Language of the Teutonic Invaders. — Differences between Anglo-Saxon and Modern English. — Anglo-Saxon Literature. — Poetry. — Prose. — The Anglo-Saxon Alphabet 26

Chapter III

INFLUENCE OF FOREIGN TONGUES UPON THE ENGLISH OF THE ANGLO-SAXON PERIOD.

The Celtic Element in Anglo-Saxon. — The Latin Element. — The Scandinavian Element . . . . 37

Chapter IV. The Norman Conquest And The French Language In England

The Norman French. — The Norman Conquest. — Effect of the Conquest upon the Native Language. — French and English Languages on English Soil. — Rise in Importance of the English. — Loss of the English Possessions in France. — Rise of Modern English Literature. — Debasement of Anglo-Norman French. — General Adoption of English by All Classes . . . .48

Chapter V. Periods In The History Of The English Language

AND THE CHANGES WROUGHT IN IT BY THE

NORMAN CONQUEST.

The Language before the Conquest. — The Language after the Conquest. — Periods of the English Language. —

Contents. xi

Literature of the Old English Period (i 150-1350). — Abandonment of Alliterative Verse for Rhyme. — Changes in Grammar between Anglo-Saxon and Middle English. — Changes in Vocabulary. — Losses of Middle English as compared with Anglo-Saxon, in Vocabulary; in Formative Prefixes and Suffixes; in Self-explaining Compounds. — Gains of the Language 82

Chapter VI. The Three Dialects Of Early English, And The Rise Of The Midland

The Three Early English Dialects. — The Northern. — The Midland. — The Southern. — Geographical Limits of these Dialects. — Differences between the Northern and the Southern Dialect, in Spelling; in Grammar; in Vocabulary. — Rise of the Midland. — The Scotch Dialect. — Early Scottish Literature 115

Chapter VII

Counteracting Influences Operating upon Language. — Changes in the Inflection of the Noun; of the Pronoun; of the Adjective; of the Verb. — Failure to Produce Complete Uniformity. — Gains and Losses of the Inflection. — Substitution of Natural for Grammatical Gender 140 xii Contents.

Chapter VIII. Modern English (155o-)

PAGE

Few Grammatical Changes. — Confusion of Case in the Pronoun. — Introduction of its. — Transition of be to the Subjunctive. — Substitution of -s for -/// in the Third Person of the Present Indicative Singular. — New Passive Formation. — Additions to the Vocabulary. — Settlement of the Orthography. — Wide Extension of English . . . 161

Chapter I. Some Features Common To All The Teutonic Tongues

Case. — Number. — Declension. — Vowel Declension in 0; in i; in u. — Consonant Declension. — Grammatic Change. — Vowel- Variation. — Vowel-Change. — Vowel- Modification . . . . . . . . . 193

Chapter II. The Noun

I. Vowel Declension. — II. Consonant Declension. — Confusion of the Inflections. — Assimilation of the Cases. — Irregular Plurals. — Foreign Plurals . . . . 209

Contents. xiii

Chapter III. The Adjective

PAGE

Indefinite (Pronominal or Strong) Declension. — Definite (Nominal or Weak) Declension. — Loss of the Adjective Inflection. — Comparison. — Double Comparison. — Irregular Comparison . . . . . .241

Chapter IV. The Pronoun

The Demonstrative Pronouns. — The Personal Pronouns. — Loss and Confusion of Inflections. — The Possessive Pronouns. — His as Sign of the Genitive. — The Reflexive Pronouns. — Pronouns of Address. — The Interrogative Pronouns. — The Relative Pronouns. — The Indefinite Pronouns 256

Chapter V. The Verb

The Teutonic Verb. — General Statements. — Conflict of the Strong and Weak Conjugations. — The Strong Conjugation. — The Weak Conjugation. — Irregular Verbs of the Weak Conjugation — The Past Participle of the Strong Conjugation. — The Past Participle of the Weak Conjugation. — Number and Person. — Tenses of the Verb. — The Present Tense, Indicative and Subjunctive. — The Preterite of the Weak Conjugation. — The Preterite of the Strong Conjugation. — The Future Tense. — Future-perfect Tense. — The Perfect and Pluxiv Contents.

PAGE

perfect. — The Imperative. — The Infinitive Mode. — The Participles. — Passive Formations. — The Preterite-present Verbs. — The Irregular Verbs, do, go, and be . 301

Index to Words and Phrases ..... 488

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.

LANGUAGES ALLIED TO THE ENGLISH.

The most superficial student of speech is well acquainted with the fact that English is no isolated, independent tongue, but one of the members of a vast family, embracing languages far removed from one another, both in time and in space. This family occupied, at an early period, large districts of Asia, and nearly the whole of Europe; and during the last four hundred years its domain has been extended still farther, over a great portion of the habitable globe. Various names have been employed to designate it as a whole. Of these the ones in most common use are Indo-Germanic, Indo-European, and Aryan, especially the last two.

Every one of the Indo-European languages is more or less closely related to every other by the fact of descent from a common mother-tongue. Of this common mother-tongue no literary monuments of

i any sort have been handed down; nor is the place known where it was originally spoken, nor the time when. Its earliest home has, indeed, been ascribed with much positiveness to various regions, both in Asia and in Europe. But for any such special assignment there has never been furnished any satisfactory proof; hardly, in fact, anything that can be deemed evidence.

This only we can say, that, at some remote periods of the past, members of the race that spoke the primitive Indo-European speech, or later descendants of it, parted company from one another, wandered in various directions, and finally formed permanent settlements far apart. Lapse of time and separation in space caused differences to spring up between these dispersed communities, — differences in customs, in beliefs, and, what most concerns us here, in language. The divergences that arose became, in the course of events, so much more important and conspicuous than the resemblances which had been preserved, that, when the scattered races and peoples that had sprung from this one primitive Indo-European tribe appear in recorded history as coming into contact with one another, they are totally unaware of the tie of blood or of speech that subsists between them. Nor was the fact of this relationship established by modern scholars until within the past hundred years.

The scientific study which has been carried on in the present century of the languages of the Indo- European family shows that in all branches of it there is a certain number of grammatical forms which bear a resemblance to each other so close that the conclusion is inevitable that they must have come from a common source. The same assertion can be made as to certain words found in all these tongues, especially personal pronouns, numerals, and nouns denoting the family relation. These are even more than proofs of a common descent. The common existence of these forms and words in languages far apart in space and time makes it clear that they must have belonged to the speech of the primitive Indo-European community before its dispersion into separate ones. From it they must have been transmitted to all its descendants. By a comparison of the forms and words thus preserved in the derived languages, it has been possible to construct a theoretical primitive language, which is the remote parent of every tongue included in this family.

Bound to each other, therefore, by the fact of common descent, all Indo-European tongues necessarily

e; but it likewise follows that the relationship ex-

ing between some is much closer than that between ^thers. According to the nearness of this relationship among themselves, the languages of the Indo-European stock have been divided into the following distinct branches 1-7

I. The Indian. — This embraces the languages of Northern Hindostan. Its great representative is the Sanskrit. In its earliest form this goes back to about two thousand years before the Christian era, and about three centuries before that epoch, it died out as a spoken tongue. It is the oldest of all the languages of the Indo-European family, and as a whole comes nearest to the primitive speech.

II. The Iranian. — This is so called from Iran, the ancient name of the country from Kurdistan to Afghanistan. The two ancient tongues belonging to it are the Persian of the cuneiform or arrow-headed inscriptions, and the so-called Zend, the language of the Avesta, the Bible of the Parsis of Western India. The principal existing representative is the modern Persian, with a literature dating from about the tenth century.

III. The Hellenic. — This is so called from the Hellenes, the inhabitants of Hellas, the names by which the Greeks have always designated themselves and their country. This branch includes the ancient Greek, with its various dialects, the ^Eolic, the Doric, the Ionic, and in particular the Attic, which became at last the common language. Its existing represeiv tative is the Romaic or Modern Greek.

IV. The Slavonic, or Slavo-Lettic. — This inclu/^^^ m ; " the languages spoken over a large portion of East % ^| Europe. Of this branch the Russian is much the most important. The Russian belongs to the Eastern division, of which the most ancient tongue is the Bulgarian. The principal languages of the Western division are the Polish and the Bohemian. Another group, called the Lettish or Lithuanic, embracing dialects spoken about the Baltic, is sometimes reckoned as a distinct branch of the Indo-European family.

v p

With none of these has the English any intimate relationship, though from the ancient Greek it has borrowed a moderately large number of words. With the three remaining branches its connections are nearer, though varying in their nature. With the first it has come into close geographical contact; from the second it has taken full half of its literary vocabulary; of the third it is itself a member.

V. The Celtic. — This branch was once widely spread over Western Europe; but it is now confined to portions of the British Isles, and to the peninsula of Brittany in North-western France. It is divided into the two following clearly defined groups : —

1 st, The Cymric. To this belong the languages or dialects once used throughout the whole of England and Southern Scotland, but now limited to the principality of Wales, and represented in it by the tongue we call the Welsh. There is one other living tongue besides the Welsh. This is the Breton, spoken in the peninsula of Brittany just mentioned, and sometimes called Armorican from Armorica, the ancient name M m that region. This language has a close affinity ' with the third member of the group, the Cornish, once the speech of the extreme south-west of Great Britain, but which died out entirely in the eighteenth century.

2d, The Gadhelic or Goidelic. Of this group the most important member is the Erse or Irish, the native language of Ireland. Two other tongues belong to it — the Gaelic, spoken in parts of the Scottish

Highlands, and the Manx, spoken by a portion of the population of the Isle of Man.

The Celtic tongues are all dying out, in some places slowly, in others rapidly. In the British Isles they are giving way to the encroachments of the English, and in France to that of the French. Linguistically they are widely removed from our speech, and, in spite of their geographical nearness, have had no influence worth speaking of on its vocabulary, and none at all on its grammar.

VI. The Italic. — The Latin is the great representative of all the ancient languages included in this branch, and is the parent of all the modern ones belonging to it. These latter are collectively called Romanic or Romance. They are descended from the Latin spoken by the common people {lingua Latina rustica), which was in several particulars different from the Latin that has been handed down in literature. Between the two numerous variations early existed, and these continued to increase during the last centuries of the Roman Empire of the West. These differences were in pronunciation, in vocabulary, and in inflection. As regards the last, the six cases of the classical Latin were, in this tongue of the common people, largely reduced in number. Forms of the verbs also fell away. Finally from this corrupt popular speech were successively developed between the tenth and thirteenth centuries the five literary languages of Western Europe, — the French and the Provencal, the Spanish and the Portuguese,

Languages allied to the English. J

and the Italian. The use of French was at first confined to Northern France; while Provencal, or the Languedoc, was the speech of the South of that country. The latter, during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries especially, flourished as a language of literature, and in it was then composed the poetry of the troubadours. But the political preponderance of Northern France carried with it the supremacy of the tongue spoken in it; and the Provencal sank from the position of a cultivated language to that of a dialect.

In various parts of South-eastern Europe there also survives a descendant of the Latin, the most important dialect of which is the Roumanian. This is spoken in the provinces of Wallachia and Moldavia, constituting the present kingdom of Roumania, and also in certain adjacent portions of the Austrian Empire. The vocabulary of this tongue has been largely affected by the languages with which it has come into contact, and especially has there been a large admixture of Slavonic words. During the present century it has begun to attain some prominence as a language of literature. Still another descendant of the Latin is a popular speech, which may be roughly described as used by scattered communities from Friuli in North-eastern Italy to the Grisons in South-eastern Switzerland. It is broken up into a number of dialects, but is sometimes called as a whole the Ladino. To it is also given the name of Rhaeto-Romanic, from the ancient Roman province of Rhaetia — a term which is often specifically applied to the dialect of it spoken in Switzerland.

The influence of the Italic branch upon English has been very great so far as regards vocabulary. This is especially true of the classical Latin and of the French. Italian and Spanish have also contributed a limited number of terms. The Latin and Romance elements in our tongue, owing to circumstances connected with its history, make up fully one-half of the number of words used in literature, though the grammar of English has been but slightly affected by any of the languages of this stock.

VII. The Teutonic. — Of this branch, which is termed by some the Germanic, English may be justly called the most important member. As we have no remains of the primitive Indo-European, so we have none of the primitive Teutonic speech, from which all the modern tongues have descended. The branch is now usually divided into two classes, the East- Germanic and the West-Germanic. Proof of the closeness of the relationship existing between the members of the East-Germanic division has not been made out so clearly as that which exists between the members of the West-Germanic; but the classification now common will be followed here, and in accordance with it a detailed description of groups and individual languages will be given.

I. To the East-Germanic class belong : —

i. The Gothic. — This was the tongue spoken by the Goths who dwelt in the Roman province of

Moesia on the Lower Danube. Hence it is sometimes called the Mceso-Gothic. It is the eldest of the Teutonic tongues that have handed down memorials of their existence, and naturally is much the most ancient in its forms. It stands, indeed, in the same relation to the other members of this branch that the Sanskrit does to all the members of the Indo- European family. Its principal literary monument is only partially preserved. This was a translation of the Bible made in the fourth century into the language of the Goths of Mcesia, by Ulfilas, their bishop. The speech died out in the ninth century, and has left no descendants.

2. The Scandinavian, or Norse. — The oldest representative of this group is the Old Norse, or, as it is sometimes called, the Old Icelandic. To Iceland it was carried in the ninth century by settlers from Norway, and there gave birth to a brilliant literature. The modern Scandinavian tongues are the Icelandic, the Swedish, the Danish, and the Norwegian. II. To the West-Germanic class belong : — 1. The High German. — This is so called because originally spoken in Upper or Southern Germany; though the modern literary High German represents as well the tongues spoken in Midland Germany. The history of the dialects belonging to it is divided into three periods. The first is that of the Old High German, extending from the eighth to the twelfth century. The second period is that of Middle High German, extending from the twelfth to the sixteenth century. Its literature is very abundant in quantity, and rich in quality. The New High German begins with the writings of the reformer Luther, in the first half of the sixteenth century, especially with his translation of the Bible. It is the language of all modern German literature, and is usually termed by us simply the German.

Next follows a group of tongues, which as spoken by the dwellers of Northern or Lower Germany, is commonly called the Low Germanic. To this group belong the following : —

2. The Low Frankish, which was spoken principally in the Netherlands, and hence during portions of its history has been called the Netherlandish. It is now represented by the Dutch of Holland, and the Flemish spoken in portions of Belgium. The Flemish, as a literary language, is essentially a dialect of the Dutch.

3. The Old Saxon, which may roughly be described as having been spoken in the region between the Rhine and the Elbe, though not in the extreme North. Its principal monument is a poem of the ninth century, written in alliterative verse, and entitled the Heliand, or ' Healer.' As regards its subject, it is a life of Christ based upon the four gospels. The modern representative of this tongue is the Piatt Deutsch, sometimes called simply Low German. This is the speech of the peasantry of Northern Germany, and extends with decided dialectic variations from the Rhine to Pomerania. The predominance of High German has prevented any general development of it as a language of literature, but many works have been written in it, among which the poems and tales of Fritz Reuter (i 8 10-1874) are especially noteworthy.

4. The Frisian, or Friesic, which was spoken in the narrow strip of coast north of the territory occupied by the Old Saxon, and in the adjacent islands. It is now much more restricted in space, being limited to a few country districts on the mainland and to a few islands along the coast. Its earliest monuments are a collection of laws, contracts, and official documents which go back no farther than the fourteenth or fifteenth centuries. At the present time it exists only as a popular speech, though attempts have been made of late to cultivate it as a literary language.

5. Closely allied to the Frisian is the Saxon or English, which is the most important of the whole group. In the fifth and sixth centuries it was carried to Great Britain by the Saxons and Angles. There it had a history, and developed a literature peculiarly its own. The earliest form of it is commonly designated by modern writers as Anglo-Saxon, or Old English.

There are several other families of speech found over the earth, but so far no evidence of relationship has been shown to exist between any of them and the Indo-European. One of the most important of these is the Semitic. It is so called because it was once assumed that the peoples who spoke the tongues belonging to it were the descendants of Shem, the eldest son of Noah; and for a similar reason the term Japhetic has occasionally been applied to the Indo- European. To the Semitic family belong among others, Assyrian, Syrian, Phoenician, Hebrew, and Arabic. There is still another family called variously the Turanian, or the Tartaric, or the Scythian, which includes among its members the tongues spoken by the Finns, the Hungarians, and the Turks. But though our speech has borrowed words from some of these languages, and from languages belonging to still other families, between it and any one of them no trace of the slightest real connection can be discovered.

As contrasted with these, English can therefore be spoken of with sufficient accuracy as a member of the Indo-European family of languages. As contrasted with its numerous related tongues, it is more specifically to be described as a member of the Low Germanic group of the Teutonic branch of that family. Its history, like^ that of all other tongues, naturally divides itself into two parts. The first embraces what, for lack of a better term, may be called its general history; that is, the account of the circumstances and conditions under which it developed its present form, of the external agencies that operated upon it, especially of the social and political influences that affected it, that modified it, and that, in particular, changed the character of its vocabulary, and transformed it from an inflectional speech into one nearly non-inflectional. The second is the history of the internal changes which took place within the language itself. It is obvious at a glance that the latter is a far more intricate and extensive subject than the former. It embraces, indeed, a vast variety of subjects, the full consideration of any one of which would require a separate volume. This work will treat of so much only of this internal history as is concerned with the variations of form that have taken place in the noun, the adjective, the pronoun, and the verb, caused by change or loss of inflection. Some notice will necessarily be taken, in addition, of the steps which the language has resorted to in order to increase its resources, and to repair the losses it has sustained, either by the development of forms entirely new, or the application of old forms to new uses. This is but a small portion of the immense field which must be covered in any full account of the interior growth and development of our speech; but beyond these limits there will, in this treatise, be no attempt to go.