In reference to MR. THORPE'S note (No. 15. p. 232.), I beg leave, with
all possible respect and deference, to suggest that his joke is not
quite _ad rem_.--What would do for a _beefsteak_ does not help his
_mistake_; for it is quite evident that _sprote_ applies to
fish-_swimming_ and not to fish-_catching_; and I presume that "useful
and sagacious" auxiliary, Dr. Kitchener himself, would hardly have
ventured to deny that _fish_ may _swim quickly_?
Now let us try how MR. THORPE'S proposed _salice=wicker_, or _sallow_,
with or without the _basket_, will suit the context. The fisherman is
asked, "Quales pisces capias? = What fish do you take?" The answer is
Anguillos &c. &c. et qualescunque in amne natant salu = Eels &c. &c.,
and every sort whatever that in water swimmeth [wicker/sallow] basket!
Let it be remembered that the question here is not, "_How_ dost thou
take fish?" which had been put and _answered before_, but "_What_ fish
dost thou take?" and then let common sense decide; for the fisherman
having already mentioned that he cast _nets_ and _hooks_, and
[_spyrian_/spartas], i.e. _baskets_, now only replies as to the _fish_
he takes.
MR. THORPE calls the A.-S. dialogue a _Gloss_; is it not rather an
_interlineary version_? like those in use, in later times, of Corderius,
and used for the same purpose.
I have no doubt that upon more mature consideration MR. THORPE will see
that it could not be a substantive that was intended; and, as he admits
my conjecture to be _specious_, that he will, in the course of his very
useful labours, ultimately find it not only specious but correct.
Meanwhile, I submit to his consideration, that beside the analogy of the
Gothic _sprauto_, we have in Icelandic _spretta_, imperf. _spratt_,
"subito movere, repente salire, emicare;" and _sprettr_, "cursus
citatus," and I do think these analogies warrant my conclusion.
I embrace this opportunity of submitting another _conjecture_ respecting
a word in MR. THORPE'S edition of the _Anglo-Saxon Paraphrase of the
Psalms_. It occurs in Ps. cvi. ver. 10., "Quid exacerbaverunt eloquium
Domini," &c., which is rendered: "Forthon hidydan Drihtnes spræce ægwaes
_ægype_." In a note MR. THORPE says: "_ægype_, non intelligo," and gives
a reason for deeming the passage corrupt. To me it seems to express the
generally accepted sense of _exacerbaverunt_: and here a cognate
language will show us the way. Icelandic _geip_, futilis exaggeratio;
_atgeipa_, exaggerare, effutire: _ægype_, then, means to _mock_, to
_deride_, and is allied to _gabban_, to gibe, to jape. In the Psalter
published by Spelman it is rendered: hi _gremedon_ spræce godes. In
Notker it is _widersprachen_, and in the two old Teutonic interlinear
version of the Psalms, published by Graff, _verbitterten_ and
_gebittert_. Let us hear our own interesting old satirist, Piers
Plouhman [Whitaker's ed. p. 365.]:
And God wol nat be gyled, quoth Gobelyn, ne be _japed_.
But I cease, lest your readers should exclaim, Res non verba. When I
have more leisure for _word-catching_, should you have space, I may
furnish a few more.