ARTICLES IN THIS SLICE:

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EPHEBI

ENGLISH LAW EPHEMERIS

ENGLISH LITERATURE EPHESIANS, EPISTLE TO THE

ENGLISHRY EPHESUS

ENGRAVING EPHESUS, COUNCIL OF

ENGROSSING EPHOD

ENGYON EPHOR

ENID EPHORUS

ENIGMA EPHRAEM SYRUS

ENKHUIZEN EPHRAIM

ENNEKING, JOHN JOSEPH EPHTHALITES

ENNIS EPI

ENNISCORTHY EPICENE

ENNISKILLEN, WILLIAM COLE EPICHARMUS

ENNISKILLEN EPIC POETRY

ENNIUS, QUINTUS EPICTETUS

ENNODIUS, MAGNUS FELIX EPICURUS

ENNS EPICYCLE

ENOCH EPICYCLOID

ENOCH, BOOK OF EPIDAURUS

ENOMOTO, BUYO EPIDIORITE

ENOS EPIDOSITE

ENRIQUEZ GOMEZ, ANTONIO EPIDOTE

ENSCHEDE EPIGONI

ENSENADA, CENON DE SOMODEVILLA EPIGONION

ENSIGN EPIGRAM

ENSILAGE EPIGRAPHY

ENSTATITE EPILEPSY

ENTABLATURE EPILOGUE

ENTADA EPIMENIDES

ENTAIL EPINAL

ENTASIS EPINAOS

ENTERITIS EPINAY, LOUISE D'ESCLAVELLES D'

ENTHUSIASM EPIPHANIUS, SAINT

ENTHYMEME EPIPHANY, FEAST OF

ENTOMOLOGY EPIRUS

ENTOMOSTRACA EPISCOPACY

ENTRAGUES, CATHERINE DE BALZAC D' EPISCOPIUS, SIMON

ENTRECASTEAUX, BRUNI D' EPISODE

ENTRE MINHO E DOURO EPISTAXIS

ENTREPOT EPISTEMOLOGY

ENTRE RIOS EPISTLE

ENVOY EPISTYLE

ENZIO EPISTYLIS

ENZYME EPITAPH

EOCENE EPITHALAMIUM

EON DE BEAUMONT EPITHELIAL and GLANDULAR TISSUES

EOTVOS, JOZSEF EPITOME

EPAMINONDAS EPOCH

EPARCH EPODE

EPAULETTE EPONA

EPEE, CHARLES-MICHEL EPONYMOUS

EPEE-DE-COMBAT EPPING

EPERJES EPPS

EPERNAY EPREMESNIL, JEAN JACQUES DUVAL D'

EPERNON EPSOM

EPHEBEUM EPSOM SALTS

ENGLISH LANGUAGE. In its historical sense, the name _English_ is now

conveniently used to comprehend the language of the English people from

their settlement in Britain to the present day, the various stages

through which it has passed being distinguished as Old, Middle, and New

or Modern English. In works yet recent, and even in some still current,

the term is confined to the third, or at most extended to the second and

third of these stages, since the language assumed in the main the

vocabulary and grammatical forms which it now presents, the oldest or

inflected stage being treated as a separate language, under the title of

_Anglo-Saxon_, while the transition period which connects the two has

been called _Semi-Saxon_. This view had the justification that, looked

upon by themselves, either as vehicles of thought or as objects of study

and analysis, Old English or Anglo-Saxon and Modern English are, for all

practical ends, distinct languages,--as much so, for example, as Latin

and Spanish. No amount of familiarity with Modern English, including its

local dialects, would enable the student to read Anglo-Saxon,

three-fourths of the vocabulary of which have perished and been

reconstructed within 900 years;[1] nor would a knowledge even of these

lost words give him the power, since the grammatical system, alike in

accidence and syntax, would be entirely strange to him. Indeed, it is

probable that a modern Englishman would acquire the power of reading and

writing French in less time than it would cost him to attain to the same

proficiency in Old English; so that if the test of distinct languages be

their degree of practical difference from each other, it cannot be

denied that "Anglo-Saxon" is a distinct language from Modern English.

But when we view the subject historically, recognizing the fact that

living speech is subject to continuous change in certain definite

directions, determined by the constitution and circumstances of mankind,

as an evolution or development of which we can trace the steps, and

that, owing to the abundance of written materials, this evolution

appears so gradual in English that we can nowhere draw distinct lines

separating its successive stages, we recognize these stages as merely

temporary phases of an individual whole, and speak of the English

language as used alike by Cynewulf, by Chaucer, by Shakespeare and by

Tennyson.[2] It must not be forgotten, however, that in this wide sense

the English language includes, not only the literary or courtly forms of

speech used at successive periods, but also the popular and, it may be,

altogether unwritten dialects that exist by their side. Only on this

basis, indeed, can we speak of Old, Middle and Modern English as the

same _language_, since in actual fact the precise _dialect_ which is now

the cultivated language, or "Standard English," is not the descendant of

that dialect which was the cultivated language or "Englisc" of Alfred,

but of a sister dialect then sunk in comparative obscurity,--even as the

direct descendant of Alfred's Englisc is now to be found in the

non-literary rustic speech of Wiltshire and Somersetshire. Causes which,

linguistically considered, are external and accidental, have shifted

the political and intellectual centre of England, and along with it

transferred literary and official patronage from one form of English to

another; if the centre of influence had happened to be fixed at York or

on the banks of the Forth, both would probably have been neglected for a

third.

The English language, thus defined, is not "native" to Britain, that is,

it was not found there at the dawn of history, but was introduced by

foreign immigrants at a date many centuries later. At the Roman Conquest

of the island the languages spoken by the natives belonged all (so far

as is known) to the Celtic branch of the Indo-European or Indo-Germanic

family, modern forms of which still survive in Wales, Ireland, the

Scottish Highlands, Isle of Man and Brittany, while one has at no

distant date become extinct in Cornwall (see CELT: Language). Brythonic

dialects, allied to Welsh and Cornish, were apparently spoken over the

greater part of Britain, as far north as the firths of Forth and Clyde;

beyond these estuaries and in the isles to the west, including Ireland

and Man, Goidelic dialects, akin to Irish and Scottish Gaelic,

prevailed. The long occupation of south Britain by the Romans (A.D.

43-409)--a period, it must not be forgotten, equal to that from the

Reformation to the present day, or nearly as long as the whole duration

of modern English--familiarized the provincial inhabitants with Latin,

which was probably the ordinary speech of the towns. Gildas, writing

nearly a century and a half after the renunciation of Honorius in 410,

addressed the British princes in that language;[3] and the linguistic

history of Britain might have been not different from that of Gaul,

Spain and the other provinces of the Western Empire, in which a local

type of Latin, giving birth to a neo-Latinic language, finally

superseded the native tongue except in remote and mountainous

districts,[4] had not the course of events been entirely changed by the

Teutonic conquests of the 5th and 6th centuries.

The Angles, Saxons, and their allies came of the Teutonic stock, and

spoke a tongue belonging to the Teutonic or Germanic branch of the

Indo-Germanic (Indo-European) family, the same race and form of speech

being represented in modern times by the people and languages of

Holland, Germany, Denmark, the Scandinavian peninsula and Iceland, as

well as by those of England and her colonies. Of the original home of

the so-called primitive Aryan race (q.v.), whose language was the parent

Indo-European, nothing is certainly known, though the subject has called

forth many conjectures; the present tendency is to seek it in Europe

itself. The tribe can hardly have occupied an extensive area at first,

but its language came by degrees to be diffused over the greater part of

Europe and some portion of Asia. Among those whose Aryan descent is

generally recognized as beyond dispute are the Teutons, to whom the

Angles and Saxons belonged.

The Teutonic or Germanic people, after dwelling together in a body,

appear to have scattered in various directions, their language gradually

breaking up into three main groups, which can be already clearly

distinguished in the 4th century A.D., North Germanic or Scandinavian,

West Germanic or Low and High German, and East Germanic, of which the

only important representative is Gothic. Gothic, often called

Moeso-Gothic, was the language of a people of the Teutonic stock, who,

passing down the Danube, invaded the borders of the Empire, and obtained

settlements in the province of Moesia, where their language was

committed to writing in the 4th century; its literary remains are of

peculiar value as the oldest specimens, by several centuries, of

Germanic speech. The dialects of the invaders of Britain belonged to the

West Germanic branch, and within this to the Low German group,

represented at the present day by Dutch, Frisian, and the various

"Platt-Deutsch" dialects of North Germany. At the dawn of history the

forefathers of the English appear to have been dwelling between and

about the estuaries and lower courses of the Rhine and the Weser, and

the adjacent coasts and isles; at the present day the most English or

Angli-form dialects of the European continent are held to be those of

the North Frisian islands of Amrum and Sylt, on the west coast of

Schleswig. It is well known that the greater part of the ancient

Friesland has been swept away by the encroachments of the North Sea, and

the _disjecta membra_ of the Frisian race, pressed by the sea in front

and more powerful nationalities behind, are found only in isolated

fragments from the Zuider Zee to the coasts of Denmark. Many Frisians

accompanied the Angles and Saxons to Britain, and Old English was in

many respects more closely connected with Old Frisian than with any

other Low German dialect. Of the Geatas, Eotas or "Jutes," who,

according to Bede, occupied Kent and the Isle of Wight, and formed a

third tribe along with the Angles and Saxons, it is difficult to speak

linguistically. The speech of Kent certainly formed a distinct dialect

in both the Old English and the Middle English periods, but it has

tended to be assimilated more and more to neighbouring southern

dialects, and is at the present day identical with that of Sussex, one

of the old Saxon kingdoms. Whether the speech of the Isle of Wight ever

showed the same characteristic differences as that of Kent cannot now be

ascertained, but its modern dialect differs in no respect from that of

Hampshire, and shows no special connexion with that of Kent. It is at

least entirely doubtful whether Bede's Geatas came from Jutland; on

linguistic grounds we should expect that they occupied a district lying

not to the north of the Angles, but between these and the old Saxons.

The earliest specimens of the language of the Germanic invaders of

Britain that exist point to three well-marked dialect groups: the

Anglian (in which a further distinction may be made between the

Northumbrian and the Mercian, or South-Humbrian); the Saxon, generally

called West-Saxon from the almost total lack of sources outside the

West-Saxon domain; and the Kentish. The Kentish and West-Saxon are

sometimes, especially in later times, grouped together as southern

dialects as opposed to midland and northern. These three groups were

distinguished from each other by characteristic points of phonology and

inflection. Speaking generally, the Anglian dialects may be

distinguished by the absence of certain normal West-Saxon vowel-changes,

and the presence of others not found in West-Saxon, and also by a strong

tendency to confuse and simplify inflections, in all which points,

moreover, Northumbrian tended to deviate more widely than Mercian.

Kentish, on the other hand, occupied a position intermediate between

Anglian and West-Saxon, early Kentish approaching more nearly to

Mercian, owing perhaps to early historical connexion between the two,

and late Kentish tending to conform to West-Saxon characteristics, while

retaining several points in common with Anglian. Though we cannot be

certain that these dialectal divergences date from a period previous to

the occupation of Britain, such evidence as can be deduced points to the

existence of differences already on the continent, the three dialects

corresponding in all likelihood to Bede's three tribes, the Angles,

Saxons and Geatas.

As it was amongst the _Engle_ or Angles of Northumbria that literary

culture first appeared, and as an Angle or _Englisc_ dialect was the

first to be used for vernacular literature, _Englisc_ came eventually to

be a general name for all forms of the vernacular as opposed to Latin,

&c.; and even when the West-Saxon of Alfred became in its turn the

literary or classical form of speech, it was still called Englisc or

_English_. The origin of the name _Angul-Seaxan_ (Anglo-Saxons) has been

disputed, some maintaining that it means a union of Angles and Saxons,

others (with better foundation) that it meant _English Saxons_, or

Saxons of England or of the Angel-cynn as distinguished from Saxons of

the Continent (see _New English Dictionary_, s.v.). Its modern use is

mainly due to the little band of scholars who in the 16th and 17th

centuries turned their attention to the long-forgotten language of

Alfred and Aelfric, which, as it differed so greatly from the English of

their own day, they found it convenient to distinguish by a name which

was applied to themselves by those who spoke it.[5] To these scholars

"Anglo-Saxon" and "English" were separated by a gulf which it was

reserved for later scholarship to bridge across, and show the historical

continuity of the English of all ages.

As already hinted, the English language, in the wide sense, presents

three main stages of development--Old, Middle and Modern--distinguished

by their inflectional characteristics. The latter can be best summarized

in the words of Dr Henry Sweet in his _History of English Sounds_:[6]

"Old English is the period of _full_ inflections (_nama_, _gifan_,

_caru_), Middle English of _levelled_ inflections (_naame_, _given_,

_caare_), and Modern English of _lost_ inflections (_name_, _give_,

_care_ = _nam_, _giv_, _car_). We have besides two periods of

transition, one in which _nama_ and _name_ exist side by side, and

another in which final e [with other endings] is beginning to drop." By

_lost_ inflections it is meant that only very few remain, and those

mostly non-syllabic, as the _-s_ in stones and loves, the _-ed_ in

loved, the _-r_ in their, as contrasted with the Old English stan_-as_,

lufadh, luf_-od-e_ and luf_-od-on_, tha_-ra_. Each of these periods may

also be divided into two or three; but from the want of materials it is

difficult to make any such division for all dialects alike in the first.

As to the chronology of the successive stages, it is of course

impossible to lay down any exclusive series of dates, since the

linguistic changes were inevitably gradual, and also made themselves

felt in some parts of the country much earlier than in others, the north

being always in advance of the midland, and the south much later in its

changes. It is easy to point to periods at which Old, Middle and Modern

English were fully developed, but much less easy to draw lines

separating these stages; and even if we recognize between each part a

"transition" period or stage, the determination of the beginning and end

of this will to a certain extent be a matter of opinion. But bearing

these considerations in mind, and having special reference to the

midland dialect from which literary English is mainly descended, the

following may be given as approximate dates, which if they do not

demarcate the successive stages, at least include them:--

Old English or Anglo-Saxon to 1100

Transition Old English ("Semi-Saxon") 1100 to 1150

Early Middle English 1150 to 1250

(Normal) Middle English 1250 to 1400

Late and Transition Middle English 1400 to 1485

Early Modern or Tudor English 1485 to 1611

Seventeenth century transition 1611 to 1688

Modern or current English 1689 onward

Dr Sweet has reckoned Transition Old English (Old Transition) from 1050

to 1150, Middle English thence to 1450, and Late or Transition Middle

English (Middle Transition) 1450 to 1500. As to the Old Transition see

further below.

The OLD ENGLISH or Anglo-Saxon tongue, as introduced into Britain, was

highly inflectional, though its inflections at the date when it becomes

known to us were not so full as those of the earlier Gothic, and

considerably less so than those of Greek and Latin during their

classical periods. They corresponded more closely to those of modern

literary German, though both in nouns and verbs the forms were more

numerous and distinct; for example, the German _guten_ answers to

_three_ Old English forms,--_godne_, _godum_, _godan_; _guter_ to

_two_--_godre_, _godra_; _liebten_ to _two_,--_lufodon_ and _lufeden_.

Nouns had four cases. _Nominative_, _Accusative_ (only sometimes

distinct), _Genitive_, _Dative_, the latter used also with prepositions

to express locative, instrumental, and most ablative relations; of a

distinct _instrumental_ case only vestiges occur. There were several

declensions of nouns, the main division being that known in Germanic

languages generally as strong and weak,--a distinction also extending to

adjectives in such wise that every adjective assumed either the strong

or the weak inflection as determined by associated grammatical forms.

The first and second personal pronouns possessed a dual number = _we

two_, _ye two_; the third person had a complete declension of the stem

he, instead of being made up as now of the three stems seen in _he_,

_she_, _they_. The verb distinguished the subjunctive from the

indicative mood, but had only two inflected tenses, present and past

(more accurately, that of incomplete and that of completed or "perfect"

action)--the former also used for the future, the latter for all the

shades of past time. The order of the sentence corresponded generally to

that of German. Thus from King Alfred's additions to his translation of

Orosius: "Donne thy ylcan daege hi hine to thaem ade beran wylladh

thonne todaeladh hi his feoh thaet thaer to lafe bidh aefter thaem

gedrynce and thaem plegan, on fif odhdhe syx, hwilum on ma, swa swa

thaes feos andefn bidh" ("Then on the same day [that] they him to the

pile bear will, then divide they his property that there to remainder

shall be after the drinking and the sports, into five or six, at times

into more, according as the property's value is").

The poetry was distinguished by alliteration, and the abundant use of

figurative and metaphorical expressions, of bold compounds and archaic

words never found in prose. Thus in the following lines from Beowulf

(ed. Thorpe, l. 645, Zupitza 320):--

Straet waes stan-fah, stig wisode

Gumum aetgaedere. gudh-byrne scan

Heard hond-locen. hring-iren scir

Song in searwum, tha hie to sele furdhum

In hyra gry're geatwum gangan cwomon.

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, "English Language" to "Epsom Salts" Volume 9, Slice 6 · 第 5 / 39 题