with the Thames as boundary between Southern and Midland, and the Humber
between Midland and Northern. And yet of five actual limiting lines
taken at random, only the first coincides approximately with the line of
Humber or Thames.
Still the classification rests on a practical truth. Although each
dialectal feature has its own boundaries, these are not set by pure
chance. Their position is to some extent governed by old tribal and
political divisions, by the influence of large towns which served as
commercial and administrative centres, and by relative ease of
communication. Consequently, linguistic features are roughly grouped,
and it is _a priori_ likely that London and Oxford would have more
features in common than would London and York, or Oxford and Hull; and
similarly it is likely that for a majority of phenomena York and Hull
would stand together against London and Oxford. Such a grouping was
recognized in the fourteenth century. Higden and his authorities
distinguish Northern and Southern speech (XIII _b_); in the Towneley
_Second Shepherds' Play_, ll. 201 ff., when Mak pretends to be a yeoman
of the king, he adopts the appropriate accent, and is promptly told to
'take outt that Sothren tothe'. In the _Reeves Tale_ Chaucer makes the
clerks speak their own Northern dialect, so we may be sure that he
thought of it as a unity.
But had Chaucer been asked exactly where this dialect was spoken, he
would probably have replied, _Fer in the North,—I kan nat telle where_.
A dialect has really no precise boundaries; its borders are nebulous;
and throughout this book 'Southern', 'Northern', &c., are used vaguely,
and not with any sharply defined limits in mind. The terms may, however,
be applied to precise areas, so long as the boundaries of single dialect
features are not violently made to conform. It is quite accurate to say
that _-and(e)_ is the normal ending of the pres. p. north of the Humber,
and that _u_ for OE. _y_ is found south of the Thames and west of
London, provided it is not implied that the one should not be found
south of the Humber, or the other north of the Thames. Both in fact
occur in _Gawayne_ (Cheshire or Lancashire); and in general the language
of the Midlands was characterized by the overlapping of features which
distinguish the North from the South.
From what has been said it should be plain that the localization of a
piece of Middle English on the evidence of language alone calls for an
investigation of scope and delicacy. Where the facts are so complex the
mechanical application of rules of thumb may give quick and specious
results, but must in the end deaden the spirit of inquiry, which is the
best gift a student can bring to the subject.
§ 3. VOCABULARY. The readiness of English speakers to adopt words from
foreign languages becomes marked in fourteenth-century writings. But the
classical element which is so pronounced in modern literary English is
still unimportant. There are few direct borrowings from Latin, and
these, like _obitte_ XVI 269, are for the most part taken from the
technical language of the Church. The chief sources of foreign words are
Norse and French.
(_a_) #Norse.# Although many Norse words first appear in English in late
texts, they must have come into the spoken language before the end of
the eleventh century, because the Scandinavian settlements ceased after
the Norman Conquest. The invaders spoke a dialect near enough to OE. to
be intelligible to the Angles; and they had little to teach of
literature or civilization. Hence the borrowings from Norse are all
popular; they appear chiefly in the Midlands and North, where the
invaders settled; and they witness the intimate fusion of two kindred
languages. From Norse we get such common words as _anger_, _both_,
_call_, _egg_, _hit_, _husband_, _ill_, _law_, _loose_, _low_, _meek_,
_take_, _till_ (prep.), _want_, _weak_, _wing_, _wrong_, and even the
plural forms of the 3rd personal pronoun (§ 12).
It is not always easy to distinguish Norse from native words, because
the two languages were so similar during the period of borrowing, and
Norse words were adopted early enough to be affected by all ME. sound
changes. But there were some dialectal differences between ON. and OE.
in the ninth and tenth centuries, and these afford the best criteria of
borrowing. For instance in ME. we have _þouȝ_, _þof_ (ON. _þō̆h_
for _*þauh_) beside _þei(h)_ (OE. _þē(a)h_) II 433; _ay_ (ON. _ei_)
'ever' XVI 293 beside _oo_ (OE. _ā_) XV _b_ 7; _waik_ (ON. _veik-r_)
VIII _b_ 23, where OE. _wāc_ would yield _wǭk_; the forms
_wǭre_ XVI 17 (note) and _wāpin_ XIV _b_ 15 are from ON. _várum_,
_vápn_, whereas _wēre(n)_ and _wĕppen_ V 154 represent OE.
(Anglian) _wēron_, _wēpn_. So we have the pairs _awe_ (ON. _agi_)
I 83 and _ay_ (OE. _ege_) II 571; _neuen_ (ON. _nefna_) 'to name' XVII
12 and _nem(p)ne_ (OE. _nemnan_) II 600; _rot_ (ON. _rót_) II 256 and
_wort_ (OE. _wyrt_) VIII _a_ 303; _sterne_, _starne_ (ON. _stjarna_)
XVII 8, 423 and native _sterre_, _starre_ (OE. _steorra_); _systyr_ (ON.
_systir_) I 112 and _soster_ (OE. _sweostor_) XV _g_ 10; _werre_,
_warre_ (ON. _verri_) XVI 154 (note), 334 and native _werse_, _wars_
(OE. _wyrsa_) XVI 200, XVII 191; _wylle_ (ON. _vill-r_) V 16 and native
_wylde_ (OE. _wilde_) XV _b_ 19.
Note that in Norse borrowings the consonants _g_, _k_ remain stops where
they are palatalized in English words: _garn_ XVII 298, _giue_, _gete_
(ON. _garn_, _gefa_, _geta_) beside _ȝarn_, _ȝiue_, _for-ȝete_
(OE. _gearn_, _giefan_, _for-gietan_); _kirke_ (ON. _kirkja_) beside
_chirche_ (OE. _cirice_). Similarly OE. initial _sc-_ regularly becomes
ME. _sh-_, so that most words beginning with _sk-_, like _sky_, _skin_,
_skyfte_ VI 209 (English _shift_), _skirte_ (English _shirt_), are
Norse; see the alliterating words in V 99.
There is an excellent monograph by E. Björkman: _Scandinavian Loan-Words
in Middle English_, 1900.
(_b_) #French.# Most early borrowings from French were again due to
invasion and settlement. But the conditions of contact were very
different. Some were unfavourable to borrowing: the Normans, who were
relatively few, were dispersed throughout the country, and not, like the
Scandinavians, massed in colonies; and their language had little in
common with English. So the number of French words in English texts is
small before the late thirteenth and the fourteenth centuries. Other
conditions made borrowing inevitable: the French speakers were the
governing class; they gradually introduced a new system of
administration and new standards of culture; and they had an important
literature to which English writers turned for their subject-matter and
their models of form. Fourteenth-century translators adopt words from
their French originals so freely (see note at p. 234, foot), that
written Middle English must give a rather exaggerated impression of the
extent of French influence on the spoken language. But a few examples
will show how many common words are early borrowings from French: nouns
like _country_, _face_, _place_, _river_, _courtesy_, _honour_, _joy_,
_justice_, _mercy_, _pity_, _reason_, _religion_, _war_; adjectives like
_close_, _large_, _poor_; and verbs _cry_, _pay_, _please_, _save_,
_serve_, _use_.
Anglo-French was never completely homogeneous, and it was constantly
supplemented as a result of direct political, commercial, and literary
relations with France. Hence words were sometimes adopted into ME. in
more than one French dialectal form. For instance, Late Latin _ca-_
became _cha-_ in most French dialects, but remained _ca-_ in the North
of France: hence ME. _catch_ and _(pur)chase_, _catel_ and _chatel_,
_kanel_ 'neck' V 230 and _chanel_ 'channel' XIII _a_ 57. So Northern
French preserves initial _w-_, for which other French dialects
substitute _g(u)_: hence _Wowayn_ V 121 beside _Gawayn_ V 4, &c. (see
note to V 121). Again, in Anglo-French, _a_ before nasal + consonant
alternates with _au_:—_dance_: _daunce_; _chance_: _chaunce_; _change_:
_chaunge_; _chambre_ XVII 281: _chaumber_ II 100. English still has the
verbs _launch_ and _lance_, which are ultimately identical.
As borrowing extended over several centuries, the ME. form sometimes
depends on the date of adoption. Thus Latin _fidem_ becomes early French
_feið_, later _fei_, and later still _foi_. ME. has both _feiþ_ and
_fay_, and by Spenser's time _foy_ appears.
The best study of the French element in ME. is still that of D. Behrens:
_Beiträge zur Geschichte der französischen Sprache in England_, 1886. A
valuable supplement, dealing chiefly with Anglo-French as the language
of the law, is the chapter by F. W. Maitland in _The Cambridge History
of English Literature_, vol. i.
§ 4. HANDWRITING. In the ME. period two varieties of script were in use,
both developed from the Caroline minuscule which has proved to be the
most permanent contribution of the schools of Charlemagne. The one,
cursive and flourished, is common in charters, records, and memoranda;
see C. H. Jenkinson and C. Johnson, _Court Hand_, 2 vols., Oxford 1915.
The other, in which the letters are separately written, with few
flourishes or adaptations of form in combination, is the 'book hand', so
called because it is regularly used for literary texts. Between the
extreme types there are many gradations; and fifteenth-century copies,
such as the Cambridge MS. of Barbour's _Bruce_, show an increasing use
of cursive forms, which facilitate rapid writing.
The shapes of letters were not always so distinct as they are in print,
so that copyists of the time, and even modern editors, are liable to
mistake one letter for another. Each hand has its own weaknesses, but
the letters most commonly misread are:—
_e_ : _o_ e.g. _Beuo_ for _Bouo_ I 59; _wroche_ for _wreche_ II 333;
_teches_ IV _b_ 60, where _toches_ (foot-note) is probably right;
pesible (MS. _posible_) XI _b_ 67.
_u_ : _n_ (practically indistinguishable) e.g. _menys_ (MS. _mouys_) XVI
301; _skayned_ (edd. _skayued_) V 99; _ryueȝ_ or _ryneȝ_ V 222
(note). This is only a special case of the confusion of letters and
combinations formed by repetition of the downstroke, e.g. _u_, _n_, _m_,
and _i_ (which is not always distinguished by a stroke above). Hence
_dim_ II 285 where modern editors have _dun_, although _i_ has the
distinguishing stroke.
_y_ : _þ_ e.g. _ye_ (MS. _þe_) XIV _d_ 11; see note to XV _a_ 12.
Confusion is increased by occasional transference to _þ_ of the dot
which historically may stand over _y_. _ȝ_ for _þ_ initially, as in
XVI 170, is more often due to confusion of the letters _þ_: _y_ and
subsequent preference of _ȝ_ for _y_ in spelling (§ 5 i) than to
direct confusion of _þ_: _ȝ_, which are not usually very similar in
late Middle English script.
_þ_ : _h_ e.g. _doþ_ (MS. _doh_) XV _b_ 22; and notes to XII _b_ 116, XVI
62.
_b_ : _v_ e.g. _vousour_ (edd. _bonsour_) II 363.
_c_ : _t_ e.g. _cunesmen_ (edd. _tunesmen_) XV _g_ 6 (note); _top_ (edd.
_cop_) ibid. 16; see note to XIII _a_ 7.
_f_ : _ſ_ (= _s_) e.g. _slang_ (variant _flang_) X 53.
_l_ : _ſ_ (= _s_) e.g. _al_ (edd. _as_) II 108.
_l_ : _k_ e.g. _kyþeȝ_ (MS. _lyþeȝ_) VI 9.
§ 5. SPECIAL LETTERS. Two letters now obsolete are common in
fourteenth-century MSS.: _þ_ and _ȝ_.
_þ_: 'thorn', is a rune, and stands for the voiced and voiceless sounds
now represented by _th_ in _this_, _thin_. The gradual displacement of
_þ_ by _th_, which had quite a different sound in classical Latin (note
to VIII _a_ 23), may be traced in the MSS. printed (except X, XII). _þ_
remained longest in the initial position, but by the end of the
fifteenth century was used chiefly in compendia like _þe_ 'the', _þt_
'that'.
_ȝ_: called '_ȝoȝ_' or '_yogh_', derives from _<g>_, the OE.
script form of the letter _g_. It was retained in ME. after the Caroline
form _g_ had become established in vernacular texts, to represent a
group of spirant sounds:
(i) The initial spirant in _ȝoked_ IX 253 (OE. _geoc-_), _ȝere_ I
151 (OE. _gēar_), where the sound was approximately the same as in
our _yoke_, _year_. Except in texts specially influenced by the
tradition of French spelling, _y_ (which is ambiguous owing to its
common use as a vowel = _i_) is less frequent than _ȝ_ initially.
Medially the palatal spirant is represented either by _ȝ_ or _y_:
_eȝe_ (OE. _ē(a)ȝ-_) XV _c_ 14 beside _eyen_ VIII _a_ 168;
_iseȝe_ (OE. _gesegen_) XIV _c_ 88 beside _iseye_ XIV _c_ 16. The
medial guttural spirant more commonly develops to _w_ in the fourteenth
century: _awe_ (ON. _agi_) I 83, _felawe_ (ON. _félagi_) XIV _d_ 7,
_halwes_ (OE. _halg-_), beside _aȝ-_ V 267, _felaȝ-_ V 83,
_halȝ-_ V 54.
(ii) The medial or final spirant, guttural or palatal, which is lost in
standard English, but still spelt in _nought_, _through_, _night_,
_high_: ME. _noȝt_, _þurȝ_, _nyȝt_, _hyȝ_: OE. _noht_,
_þurh_, _niht_, _hēh_. The ME. sound was probably like that in German
_ich_, _ach_. The older spelling with _h_ is occasionally found; more
often _ch_ as in _mycht_ X 17; but the French spelling _gh_ gains ground
throughout the century. Abnormal are _write_ for _wrighte_ XVI 230,
_wytes_, _nytes_ for _wyȝtes_, _nyȝtes_ XV _i_ 19 f.
(iii) As these sounds weakened in late Southern ME., _ȝ_ was
sometimes used without phonetic value, or at the most to reinforce a
long _i_: e.g. _Engliȝsch_ XI _a_ 28, 37, &c.; _kyȝn_ 'kine' IX
256.
N.B.—Entirely distinct in origin and sound value, but identical in
script form, is _ȝ_, the minuscule form of _z_, in _Aȝone_ (=
_Azone_) I 105, _clyffeȝ_ 'cliffs' V 10, &c. It would probably be
better to print _z_ in such words.
§ 6. SPELLING. Modern English spelling, which tolerates almost any
inconsistency in the representation of sounds provided the same word is
always spelt in the approved way, is the creation of printers, schools,
and dictionaries. A Middle English writer was bound by no such arbitrary
rules. Michael of Northgate, whose autograph MS. survives, writes
_diaknen_ III 5 and _dyacne_ 9; _vyf_ 22, _uif_ 23, _vif_ 37; _þouzond_
30 and _þousend_ 34. Yet his spelling is not irrational. The comparative
regularity of his own speech, which he reproduced directly, had a
normalizing influence; and by natural habit he more often than not
solved the same problem of representation in the same way. Scribes, too,
like printers in later times, found a measure of consistency convenient,
and the spelling of some transcripts, e.g. I and X, is very regular. If
at first ME. spelling appears lawless to a modern reader, it is because
of the variety of dialects represented in literature, the widely
differing dates of the MSS. printed, and the tendency of copyists to mix
their own spellings with those of their original.
The following points must be kept in mind:
(i) _i_ : _y_ as vowels are interchangeable. In some MSS. (for instance,
I) _y_ is used almost exclusively; in others (VIII _a_) it is preferred
for distinctness in the neighbourhood of _u_, _n_, _m_, so that the
scribe writes _hym_, but _his_.
(ii) _ie_ is found in later texts for long close _ẹ̄_: _chiere_ XII
_a_ 120, _flietende_ XII _a_ 157, _diemed_ XII _b_ 216.
(iii) _ui_ (_uy_), in the South-West and West Midlands, stands for
_ǖ_ (sounded as in French _amuser_): _puit_ XIV _c_ 12; _vnkuynde_
XIV _c_ 103. The corresponding short _ü_ is spelt _u_: _hull_ '_hill_',
&c.
(iv) Quite distinct is the late Northern addition of _i_ (_y_), to
indicate the long vowels _ā_, _ē_, _ō_: _neid_ X 18, _noyne_
'noon' X 67.
(v) _ou_ (_ow_) is the regular spelling of long _ū_ (sounded as in
_too_): _hous_, _now_, _founden_, &c.
(vi) _o_ is the regular spelling for short _u_ (sounded as in _put_) in
the neighbourhood of _u_, _m_, _n_, because if _u_ is written in
combination with these letters an indistinct series of downstrokes
results. Hence _loue_ but _luf_, _come_ infin., _sone_ 'son', _dronken_
'drunk'. In _Ayenbyte_ _o_ for _ŭ_ is general, e.g. _grochinge_ III
10. In other texts it is common in _bote_ 'but'.
(vii) _u_ : _v_ are not distinguished as consonant and vowel. _v_ is
preferred in initial position, _u_ medially or finally: _valay_
'valley', _vnder_ 'under', _vuel_ (= _üvel_) 'evil', _loue_ 'love'.
(Note that in XII the MS. distinction of _v_ and _u_ is not reproduced.)
(viii) So _i_, and its longer form _j_, are not distinguished as vowel
and consonant. In this book _i_ is printed throughout, and so stands
initially for the sound of our _j_ in _ioy_, _iuggement_, &c.
(ix) _c_ : _k_ for the sounds in _kit_, _cot_, are often interchangeable;
but _k_ is preferred before palatal vowels _e_, _i_ (_y_); and _c_
before _o_, _u_. See the alliterating words in V 52, 107, 128, 153, 272,
283.
(x) _c_ : _s_ alternate for voiceless _s_, especially in French words:
_sité_ 'city' VII 66, _resayue_ 'receive' V 8, _vyse_ 'vice' V 307,
_falce_ V 314; but also in _race_ (ON. _rás_) V 8 beside _rase_ XVII
429.
(xi) _s_ : _z_ (_ȝ_) are both used for voiced _s_, the former
predominating: _kyssedes_ beside _raȝteȝ_ V 283; _þouzond_ III 30
beside _þousend_ III 34. But _ȝ_ occasionally appears for voiceless
_s_: _(aȝ-)leȝ_ 'awe-less' V 267, _forȝ_ 'force' 'waterfall' V
105.
(xii) _sh_ : _sch_ : _ss_ are all found for modern _sh_, OE. _sc_: _shuld_
I 50; _schert_ II 230; _sserte_ III 40; but _sal_ 'shall', _suld_
'should' in Northern texts represent the actual Northern pronunciation
in weakly stressed words.
(xiii) _v_ : _w_: In late Northern MSS. _v_ is often found for initial
_w_: _vithall_ X 9, _Valter_ X 36. The interchange is less common in
medial positions: _in swndir_ X 106.
(xiv) _wh-_ : _qu(h)-_ : _w-_ :—_wh-_ is a spelling for _hw-_. In the
South the aspiration is weakened or lost, and _w_ is commonly written,
e.g. VIII _b_. In the North the aspiration is strong, and the sound is
spelt _qu(h)-_, e.g. _quhelis_ 'wheels' X 17. Both _qu-_ and _wh-_ are
found in _Gawayne_. The development in later dialects is against the
assumption that _hw-_ became _kw-_ in pronunciation.
See also § 5.
The whole system of ME. spelling was modelled on French, and some of the
general features noted above (e.g. ii, iii, v, vi, x) are essentially
French. But, particularly in early MSS., there are a number of
exceptional imitations. Sometimes the spelling represents a French
scribe's attempt at English pronunciation: _foret_ in XV _g_ 18 stands
for _forþ_, where _-rþ_ with strongly trilled _r_ was difficult to a
foreigner; and occasionally such distortions are found as _knith_,
_knit_, and even _kint_ (_Layamon_, _Havelok_) for _kniȝt_, which had
two awkward consonant groups. More commonly the copyist, accustomed to
write both French and English, chose a French representation for an
English sound. So _st_ for _ht_ appears regularly in XV _e_: _seuenist_
'sennight', and XV _g_: _iboust_ 'bought', &c. The explanation is that
in French words like _beste_ 'bête', _gist_ 'gît', _s_ became only a
breathing before it disappeared; and _h_ in ME. _ht_ weakened to a
similar sound, as is shown by the rimes with _Kryste_ 'Christ' in VI
98-107. Hence the French spelling _st_ is occasionally substituted for
English _ht_. Again, in borrowings from French, _an_ + consonant
alternates with _aun_: _dance_ or _daunce_; _change_ or _chaunge_ (p.
273); and by analogy we have _Irlande_ or _Irlaunde_ in XV _d_. Another
exceptional French usage, _-tz_ for final voiceless _-s_, is explained
at p. 219, top.
§ 7. SOUND CHANGES. (_a_) #Vowel Quantity.# No fourteenth-century writer
followed the early example of Orm. Marks of quantity are not used in
fourteenth-century texts; doubling of long vowels is not an established
rule; and there are no strictly quantitative metres, or treatises on
pronunciation. Consequently it is not easy to determine how far the
quantity of the vowels in any given text has been affected by the very
considerable changes that occurred in the late OE. and ME. periods.
Of these the chief are:
(i) In unstressed syllables original long vowels tend to become short.
Hence _ŭs_ (OE. _ūs_), and _bŏte_ (OE. _būtan_) 'but', which
are usually unstressed.
(ii) All long vowels are shortened in stressed close syllables (i.e.,
_usually_, when they are followed by two consonants): e.g. _kēpen_,
pa. t. _kĕpte_, pp. _kĕpt_; _hŭsband_ beside _hous_;
_wĭmmen_ (from _wĭf-men_) beside _wīf_.
_Exception._ Before the groups _-ld_, _-nd_, _-rd_, _-rð_, _-mb_, a
short vowel is lengthened in OE. unless a third consonant immediately
follows. Hence, before any of these combinations, length may be retained
in ME.: e.g. _fēnd_ 'fiend', _bīnden_, _chīld_; but
_chĭldren_.
(iii) Short vowels _ă_, _ĕ_, _ŏ_ are lengthened in stressed
open syllables (i.e., _usually_, when they are followed by a single
consonant with a following vowel): _tă|ke_ > _táke_; _mĕ|te_ >
_méte_ 'meat'; _brŏ|ken_ > _bróken_. To what extent _ĭ_ and _ŭ_
were subject to the same lengthening in Northern districts is still
disputed. Normally they remain short in South and S. Midlands, e.g.
_drĭuen_ pp.; _lŏuen_ = _lŭven_ 'to love'.
There are many minor rules and many exceptions due to analogy; but
roughly it may be taken that ME. vowels are:
_short_ when unstressed;
_short_ before two consonants, except _-ld_, _-nd_, _-rd_, _-rð_, _-mb_;
_long_ (except _i_ (_y_), _u_) before a single medial consonant;
otherwise of the quantity shown in the Glossary for the OE. or ON.
etymon.
(_b_) #Vowel Quality.# The ME. sound-changes are so many and so obscure
that it will be possible to deal only with a few that contribute most to
the diversity of dialects, and it happens that the particular changes
noticed all took effect before the fourteenth century.
(i) OE. and ON. _ā_ develop to long open _ǭ_ (sounded as in
_broad_), first in the South and S. Midlands, later in the N. Midlands.
In the North _ā_ (sounded approximately as in _f~a~ther_) remains:
e.g. _bane_ 'bone' IV _a_ 54, _balde_ 'bold' IV _a_ 51. The boundary
seems to have been a line drawn west from the Humber, and this
approximates to the dividing line in the modern dialects. There are of
course instances of _ǭ_ to the north and of _ā_ to the south of
the Humber, since border speakers would be familiar with both _ā_ and
_ǭ_, or would have intermediate pronunciations; and poets might use
convenient rimes from neighbouring dialects.
(ii) OE. _ȳ̆_ (deriving from Germanic _ū̆_ followed by _i_)
appears _normally_ in E. Midlands and the North as _ī̆_ (_ȳ̆_):
e.g. _kȳn_, _hill_ (OE. _cȳ_, _hyll_). In the South-East,
particularly Kent, it appears as _ẹ̆̄_: _kēn_, _hell_. In the
South-West, and in W. Midlands, it commonly appears as _u_, _ui_ (_uy_),
with the sound of short or long _ü_. London was apparently at a meeting
point of the _u_, _i_, and _e_ boundaries, because all the forms appear
in fourteenth-century London texts, though _ṻ̆_ and _ē̆_ gradually
give place to _ī̆_. The extension of _ṻ̆_ forms to the North-West
is shown by _Gawayne_, and a line drawn from London to Liverpool would
give a rough idea of the boundary. But within this area unrounding of
_ṻ̆_ to _ī̆_ seems to have been progressive during the century.
N.B.—It is dangerous to jump to conclusions from isolated examples.
Before _r_ + consonant _e_ is sometimes found in all dialects, e.g.
_schert_ II 230. _Church_, spelt with _u_, _i_, or _e_, had by etymology
OE. _i_, not _y_. And in Northern texts there are a number of
_e_-spellings in open syllables, both for OE. _y_ and _i_.
(_c_) #Consonants#:
(i) _f_ > _v_ (initial): this change, which dates back to OE. times, is
carried through in _Ayenbyte_: e.g. _uele uayre uorbisnen_ = Midland
'_fele fayre forbisnes_'. In some degree it extended over the whole of
the South.
(ii) _s_ > _z_ (initial), parallel to the change of _f_ to _v_, is
regularly represented in spelling in the _Ayenbyte_: _zome_ 'some', &c.
Otherwise _z_ is rare in spelling, but the voiced initial sound probably
extended to most of the Southern districts where it survives in modern
dialect.
§ 8. PRONUNCIATION. One of the best ways of studying ME. pronunciation
is to learn by heart a few lines of verse in a consistent dialect, and
to correct their repetition as more precise knowledge is gained. The
spelling can be relied on as very roughly phonetic if the exceptional
usages noted in § 6 are kept in mind. Supplementary and controlling
information is provided by the study of rimes, of alliteration, and of
the history of English and French sounds.
#Consonants.# Where a consonant is clearly pronounced in Modern English,
its value is nearly enough the same for ME. But modern spelling
preserves many consonants that have been lost in speech, and so is
rather a hindrance than a help to the beginner in ME. For instance, the
initial sounds in ME. _kniȝt_ and _niȝt_ were not the same, for
_kniȝt_ alliterates always with _k-_ (V 43, 107) and _niȝt_ with
_n-_ (VII 149); and initial _wr-_ in _wringe_, _wriȝte_ is distinct
from initial _r-_ in _ring_, _riȝt_ (cp. alliteration in VIII _a_
168, V 136). Nor can _wriȝte_ rime with _write_ in a careful
fourteenth-century poem. In words like _lerne_, _doghter_, _r_ was
pronounced with some degree of trilling. And although there are signs of
confusion in late MSS. (IV _a_, XVI, XVII), double consonants were
generally distinguished from single: _sonne_ 'sun' was pronounced
_sŭn-ne_, and so differed from _sone_ 'son', which was pronounced
_sŭ-ne_ (§ 6 vi).
#Vowels.# Short vowels _ă_, _ĕ_, _ĭ_, _ŏ_, _ŭ_ (§ 6 vi)
were pronounced respectively as in French _patte_, English _pet_, _pit_,
_pot_, _put_. Final unstressed _-e_ was generally syllabic, with a sound
something like the final sound in _China_ (§ 9).
The long vowels _ā_, _ī_, _ū_ (§ 6 v) were pronounced
approximately as in _f~a~ther_, _mach~i~ne_, _cr~u~de_. But _ē_ and
_ō_ present special difficulties, because the spelling failed to make
the broad distinction between open _ǭ_ and close _ọ̄_, open
_ę̄_ and close _ẹ̄_—a distinction which, though relative only
(depending on the greater or less opening of the mouth passage), is
proved to have been considerable by ME. rimes, and by the earlier and
subsequent history of the long sounds represented in ME. by _e_, _o_.
(i) Open _ǭ_ (as in _broad_) derives:
(_a_) from OE. _ā_, according to § 7 b i: OE. _brād_,
_bāt_, _báld_ > ME. _brǭd_, _bǭt_, _bǭld_ > NE.
_broad_, _boat_, _bold_. The characteristic modern spelling is
thus _oa_.
(_b_) from OE. _ŏ_ in open syllables according to § 7 a iii:
OE. _brŏcen_ > ME. _brǫ́́ke(n)_ > NE. _broken_.
NOTE.—In many texts the rimes indicate a distinction in
pronunciation between _ǭ_ derived from OE. _ā_ and _ǭ_
derived from OE. _ŏ_, and the distinction is still made in NW.
Midland dialects.
(ii) Close _ọ̄_ (pronounced rather as in French _beau_ than as
in standard English _so_ which has developed a diphthong _ọu_),
derives from OE. _ō_: OE. _gōs_, _dōm_, _góld_ > ME.
_gọ̄s_, _dọ̄m_, _gọ̄ld_ > NE. _goose_, _doom_, _gold_.
The characteristic modern spelling is _oo_.
NOTE.—(1) After consonant + _w_, _ǭ_ often develops in ME.
to _ọ̄_: OE. _(al)swā_, _twā_ > ME. _(al)sǭ_, _twǭ_ >
later _(al)sọ̄_, _twọ̄_.
(2) In Scotland and the North _ọ̄_ becomes regularly
a sound (perhaps _ǖ_) spelt _u_: _gōd_ > _gud_, _blōd_ >
_blud_, &c.
Whereas the distribution of _ǭ_ and _ọ̄_ is practically the same
for all ME. dialects, the distinction of open _ę̄_ and close _ẹ̄_
is not so regular, chiefly because the sounds from which they derive
were not uniform in OE. dialects. For simplicity, attention will be
confined to the London dialect, as the forerunner of modern Standard
English.
(iii) South-East Midland open _ę̄_ (pronounced as in _there_)
derives:
(_a_) from OE. (Anglian) _ǣ_: Anglian _dǣl_ > SE. Midl.
_dę̄l_ > NE. _deal_;
(_b_) from OE. _ēa_: OE. _bēatan_ > ME. _bę̄te(n)_ > NE.
_beat_;
(_c_) from OE. _ĕ_ in open syllables according to § 7 a iii:
OE. _mĕte_ > ME. _mę́te_ > NE. _meat_.
The characteristic modern spelling is _ea_.
(iv) South-East Midland close _ẹ̄_ (pronounced as in French
_été_) derives:
(_a_) from OE. (Anglian) _ē_ of various origins: Anglian
_hēr_, _mēta(n)_, _(ge)lēfa(n)_ > SE. Midl. _hẹ̄re_,
_mẹ̄te(n)_, _lẹ̄ue(n)_ > NE. _here_, _meet_, _(be)lieve_.
(_b_) from OE. _ēo_: OE. _dēop_, _þēof_ > ME. _dẹ̄p_,
_þẹ̄f_ (_þief_) > NE. _deep_, _thief_.
The characteristic modern spellings are _ee_, and _ie_ which already in
ME. often distinguishes the close sound (§ 6 ii).
NOTE.—The distinction made above does not apply in South-Eastern
(Kentish), because this dialect has ME. _ea_, _ia_, _ya_ for OE. _ēa_
(iii b), and OE. _ē_ for Anglian _ǣ_ (iii a). Nor does it hold for
South-Western, because the West Saxon dialect of OE. had _gelīefan_
for Anglian _gelēfa(n)_ (iv a). West Saxon also had _strǣt_,
_-drǣdan_, where normal Anglian had _strẹ̄t_, _-drẹ̄da(n)_, but
the distribution of the place-names _Stratton_ beside _Stretton_, and of
the pa. t. and pp. _dradd(e)_ beside _dredd(e)_ (p. 270 and n.), shows
that the _ǣ_ forms were common in the extreme South and the East of
the Anglian area; so that in fourteenth-century London both _ę̄_ and
_ẹ̄_ might occur in such words, as against regular West Midland and
Northern _ẹ̄_.
In NE. Midland and Northern texts some _ē_ sounds which we should
expect to be distinguished as open and close rime together, especially
before dental consonants, e.g. _ȝēde_ (OE. _ēode_): _lēde_
(Anglian _lǣda(n)_) I 152-3.
§ 9. INFLEXIONS. Weakening and levelling of inflexions is continuous
from the earliest period of English. The strong stress falling regularly
on the first or the stem syllable produced as reflex a tendency to
indistinctness in the unstressed endings. The disturbing influence of
foreign conquest played a secondary but not a negligible part, as may be
seen from a comparison of some verbal forms in the North and the N.
Midlands, where Norse influence was strongest, with those of the South,
where it was inconsiderable:
Normal Early Early Old
OE. Sth. Nth.and Norse
ME. N. Midl.
Infin. _drīfan_ _driue(n)_ _driue_ _drífa_
Pres. p. _drīfende_ _driuinde_ _driuande_ _drífandi_
Pp. strong _gedrifen_ _ydriue_ _driuen_ _drifenn_
and although tangible evidence of French influence on the flexional
system is wanting (for occasional borrowings like _gowtes artetykes_ IX
314 are mere literary curiosities), every considerable settlement of
foreign speakers, especially when they come as conquerors, must shake
the traditions of the language of the conquered. A third cause of
uncertainty was the interaction of English dialects in different stages
of development.
The practical sense of the speakers controlled and balanced these
disruptive factors. There is no better field than Middle English for a
study of the processes of vigorous growth: the regularizing of
exceptional and inconvenient forms; the choice of the most distinctive
among a group of alternatives; the invention of new modes of expression;
the discarding of what has become useless.
At the beginning of the fourteenth century the inflexional endings are:
_-e_; _-en_; _-ene_ (weak gen. pl.); _-er_ (comparative); _-es_; _-est_;
with _-eþ_, _-ede_ (_-de_, _-te_), _-ed_ (_-d_, _-t_), _-ynge_ (_-inde_,
_-ende_, _-ande_), which are verbal only.
NOTE.—(_a_) Sometimes one of these inflexions may be substituted for
another: e.g. when _-es_ replaces _-e_ as the Northern ending of the 1st
sg. pres. ind. Such analogical substitutions must be distinguished from
phonetic developments.
(_b_) In disyllabic inflexions like _-ede_, _-ynge_ (_-ande_), final
_-e_ is lost early in the North. In polysyllables it is dropped
everywhere during the century.
(_c_) The indistinct sound of flexional _-e-_ covered by a consonant is
shown by spellings with _-i-_, _-y-_: _woundis_ X 51; _madist_ XI _b_
214; _blyndiþ_ XI _b_ 7; _fulfillid_ XVI 6; _etin_ XIV _b_ 76;
_brokynne_ XVI 195. And, especially in West Midland texts, _-us_, _-un_
(_-on_) appear for _-es_, _-en_: _mannus_ XI _b_ 234; _foundun_ XI _a_
47; _laghton_ VII 119. Complete syncope sometimes occurs: _days_ I 198,
&c.
Otherwise all the inflexions except _-e_, _-en_, are fairly stable
throughout the century.
#-en#: In the North _-en_ is found chiefly in the strong pp., where it
is stable. In the South (except in the strong pp.) it is better
preserved, occurring rarely in the dat. sg. of adjectives, e.g. _onen_
III 4, dat. pl. of nouns, e.g. _diaknen_ III 5, and in the infinitive;
more commonly in the weak pl. of nouns, where it is stable, and in the
pa. t. pl., where it alternates with _-e_. In the Midlands _-en_,
alternating with _-e_, is also the characteristic ending of the pres.
ind. pl. As a rule (where the reduced ending _-e_ is found side by side
with _-en_) _-e_ is used before words beginning with a consonant, and
_-en_ before words beginning with a vowel or _h_, to avoid hiatus. But
that the preservation of _-en_ does not depend purely on phonetic
considerations is proved by its regular retention in the Northern strong
pp., and its regular reduction to _-e_ in the corresponding Southern
form.
#-e#: Wherever _-en_ was reduced, it reinforced final _-e_, which so
became the meeting point of all the inflexions that were to disappear
before Elizabethan times.
_-e_ was the ending of several verbal forms; of the weak adjective and
the adjective pl.; of the dat. sg. of nouns; and of adverbs like
_faste_, _deepe_, as distinguished from the corresponding adjectives
_fast_, _deep_.
That _-e_ was pronounced is clear from the metres of
Chaucer, Gower, and most other Southern and Midland
writers of the time. For centuries the rhythm of their verse
was lost because later generations had become so used to
final _-e_ as a mere spelling that they did not suspect that it
was once syllabic.
But already in fourteenth-century manuscripts there is evidence of
uncertainty. Scribes often omit the final vowel where the rhythm shows
that it was syllabic in the original (see the language notes to I, II).
Conversely, in _Gawayne_ forms like _burne_ (OE. _beorn_), _race_ (ON.
_rás_), _hille_ (OE. _hyll_) appear in nominative and accusative, where
historically there should be no ending. The explanation is that, quite
apart from the workings of analogy, which now extended and now curtailed
its historical functions, _-e_ was everywhere weakly pronounced, and was
dropped at different rates in the various dialects. In the North it
hardly survives the middle of the century (IV _a_, X). In the N.
Midlands its survival is irregular. In the South and S. Midlands it is
fairly well preserved till the end of the century. But everywhere the
proportion of flexionless forms was increasing. It may be assumed that,
in speech as in verse, final _-e_ was lost phonetically first before
words beginning with a vowel or _h_.
§ 10. NOUNS: Gender, which in standard West Saxon had been to a great
extent grammatical (i.e. dependent on the forms of the noun), was by the
fourteenth century natural (i.e. dependent on the meaning of the noun).
This change had accompanied and in some degree facilitated the transfer
of nearly all nouns to the strong masculine type, which was the
commonest and best defined in late OE.:
OE. ME.
Sg. nom. acc. _cniht_ _kniȝt_
gen. _cnihtes_ _kniȝtes_
dat. _cnihte_ _kniȝte_
OE. ME.
Pl. nom. acc. _cnihtas_ _kniȝtes_
gen. _cnihta_ _kniȝtes_
dat. _cnihtum_ _kniȝtes_
In the North final _-e_ of the dat. sg. was regularly dropped early in
the fourteenth century, and even in the South the dat. sg. is often
uninflected, probably owing to the influence of the accusative. In the
plural the inflexion of the nom. acc. spreads to all cases; but in early
texts, and relatively late in the South, the historical forms are
occasionally found, e.g. gen. pl. _cniste_ (MS. _cnistes_) XV _g_ 30
(note), dat. pl. _diaknen_ III 5.
#Survivals#: (i) The common mutated plurals _man_: _men_, _fot_: _fet_,
&c., are preserved, and in VIII _b_ a gen. pl. _menne_ (OE. _manna_)
occurs; _ky_ pl. of _cow_ forms a new double pl. _kyn_, see (iii) below;
_hend_ pl. of _hand_ is Norse, cp. XVI 75 (note).
(ii) Some OE. neuters like _shep_ 'sheep' VIII _b_ 18, _ȝer_ 'year'
II 492, _þing_ II 218, _folk_ II 389, resist the intrusion of the
masculine pl. _-es_ in nominative and accusative. Pl. _hors_ II 304,
XIII _a_ 34 remains beside _horses_ XIV _b_ 73; but _deores_ 'wild
animals' occurs at XV _b_ 29, where Modern English preserves _deer_.
(iii) In the South the old weak declension with pl. _-en_ persists,
though by the fourteenth century the predominance of the strong type is
assured. The weak forms occur not only where they are historically
justified, e.g. _eyȝen_ (OE. _ēagan_) II 111, but also by analogy
in words like _honden_ (OE. pl. _honda_) II 79, _tren_ (OE. pl.
_trēo_) XIII _a_ 51, _platen_ (OFr. _plate_) XV _g_ 4. The inflexion
still survives in three double plural formations: _children_ VIII _b_ 70
beside _childer_ (OE. pl. _cildru_); _bretheren_ VIII _a_ 201 beside
_brether_ XVII 320 (OE. pl. _brōþor_); and _kyȝn_ IX 256 for _ky_
(cp. (i) above). The OE. weak gen. pl. in _-ena_ leaves its traces in
the South, e.g. _knauene_ VIII _b_ 56, XV _h_ 4, and unhistorical
_lordene_ VIII _b_ 77.
(iv) The group _fader_, _moder_, _broþer_, _doghter_ commonly show the
historical flexionless gen. sg., e.g. _doghtyr arme_ I 136; _moder
wombe_ XI _b_ 29 f.; _brother hele_ XII _a_ 18; _Fadir voice_ XVI 79.
(v) The historical gen. sg. of old strong feminines remains in _soule
dede_ (OE. _sāwle_) I 212; but _Lady day_ (OE. _hlǣfdigan dæg_) I
242 is a survival of the weak fem. gen. sg.
§ 11. ADJECTIVES. Separate flexional forms for each gender are not
preserved in the fourteenth century; but until its end the distinction
of strong and weak declensions remains in the South and South Midlands,
and is well marked in the careful verse of Chaucer and Gower. The strong
is the normal form. The weak form is used after demonstratives, _the_,
_his_, &c., and in the vocative. As types _god_ (OE. _gōd_) 'good'
and _grene_ (OE. _grēne_) 'green' will serve, because in OE.
_grēne_ had a vowel-ending in the strong nom. sg. masc., while
_gōd_ did not. The ME. paradigms are:
Singular. Plural.
Strong Weak Strong and Weak
_god_ _godė_ _godė_
_grenė_ _grenė_ _grenė_
Examples: Strong sg. _a gret serpent_ (OE. _grēat_) XII _b_ 72; _an
unkindė man_ (OE. _uncynde_) XII _b_ 1; _a stillė water_ (OE.
_stille_) XII _a_ 83. Weak sg. _The gretė gastli serpent_ XII _b_
126; _hire oghnė hertes lif_ XII _a_ 4; _O lef liif_ (where the metre
indicates _leuė_ for the original) II 102. Strong pl. _þer wer
widė wones_ II 365. Weak pl. _the smalė stones_ XII _a_ 84.
Note that strong and weak forms are identical in the plural; that even
in the singular there is no formal distinction when the OE. strong masc.
nom. ended in a vowel (_grēne_); that monosyllables ending in a vowel
(e.g. _fre_), polysyllables, and participles, are usually invariable;
and that regular dropping of final _-e_ levels all distinctions, so that
the North and N. Midlands early reached the relatively flexionless stage
of Modern English.
#Survivals.# The _Ayenbyte_ shows some living use of the adjective
inflexions. Otherwise the survivals are limited to set phrases, e.g.
gen. sg. _nones cunnes_ 'of no kind', _enes cunnes_ 'of any kind', XV
_g_ 20, 22. That the force of the inflexion was lost is shown by the
early wrong analysis _no skynnes_, _al skynnes_, &c.
#Definite Article.# Parallel to the simplification of the adjective, the
full OE. declension _sē_, _sēo_, _þæt_, &c., is reduced to
invariable _þe_. The _Ayenbyte_ alone of our specimens keeps some of the
older distinctions. Elsewhere traces appear in set phrases, e.g. neut.
sg. _þat_, _þet_ in _þat on_ 'the one', _þat oþer_ 'the other' V 344,
and, with wrong division, _þe ton_ XI _b_ 27, _the toþer_ IX 4; neut.
sg. dat. _þen_ (OE. _þǣm_), with wrong division, in _atte nale_ (for
_at þen ale_) VIII _a_ 109.
§ 12. PRONOUNS. In a brilliant study (_Progress in Language_, London
1894) Jespersen exemplifies the economy and resources of English from
the detailed history of the Pronoun. In the first and second persons
fourteenth-century usage does not differ greatly from that of the
Authorized Version of the Bible. But the pronoun of the third person
shows a variety of developments. In the singular an objective case
replaces, without practical disadvantages, the older accusative and
dative: _him_ (OE. _hine_ and _him_), _her(e)_ (OE. _hīe_ and
_hiere_), _(h)it_ (OE. _hit_ and _him_). The possessive _his_ still
serves for the neuter as well as the masculine, e.g. _þat ryuer...
chaungeþ ~hys~ fordes_ XIII _a_ 55 f.; though an uninflected neuter
possessive _hit_ occasionally appears in the fourteenth century. In the
plural, where one would expect objective _him_ from the regular OE. dat.
pl. _him_, clearness is gained by the choice of unambiguous _hem_, from
an OE. dat. pl. by-form _heom_.
But as we see from _Orfeo_, ll. 408, 446, 185, in some dialects the nom.
sg. masc. (OE. _hē_), nom. sg. fem. (OE. _hēo_), and nom. pl. (OE.
_hīe_), had all become ME. _he_. The disadvantages of such ambiguity
increased as the flexional system of nouns and adjectives collapsed, and
a remedy was found in the adoption of new forms. For the nom. sg. fem.,
_s(c)he_, _s(c)ho_ (mostly Northern), come into use, which are probably
derived from _si̯ē_, _se̯ō_, the corresponding case of the
definite article. The innovation was long resisted in the South, and
_ho_, an unambiguous development of _heō_, remains late in W. Midland
texts like _Pearl_.
In the nom. pl. ambiguous _he_ was replaced by _þei_, the
nom. pl. of the Norse definite article. This is the regular
form in all except the Southern specimens II (orig.), III, XIII.
And although the full series of Norse forms _þei_, _þeir_, _þe(i)m_
is found in Orm at the beginning of the thirteenth century,
Chaucer and other Midland writers of the fourteenth century
as a rule have only _þei_, with native English _her(e)_, _hem_ in the
oblique cases. (For details see the language note to each
specimen.)
The poss. pl. _her(e)_, beside _hor(e)_, was still liable to confusion
with the obj. sg. fem. _her(e)_, cp. II 92. Consequently this was
the next point to be gained by the Norse forms, e.g. in VII 181.
In the Northern texts X, XVI, XVII, all from late MSS., the
Norse forms _þai_, _þa(i)r_, _þa(i)me_ are fully established; but
_(h)em_, which was throughout unambiguous, survived into
modern dialects in the South and Midlands.
Note the reduced nominative form _a_ 'he', 'they' in XIII; and the
objective _his(e)_ 'her', 'them' in III, which has not been
satisfactorily explained.
#Relative#: The general ME. relative is _þat_, representing all genders
and cases (note to XV _i_ 4). Sometimes definition is gained by adding
the personal pronoun: _þat... he (sche)_ = 'who'; _þat... it_ = 'which';
_þat... his_ = 'whose'; _þat ... him_ = 'whom', &c.; e.g. _a well, ~þat~
in the day ~it~ is so cold_ IX 5-6, cp. V 127 (note); _oon ~That~ with a
spere was thirled ~his~ brest-boon_ 'one whose breast-bone was pierced
with a spear', _Knight's Tale_ 1851. For the omission of _þat_ see note
to XIII _a_ 36.
In later texts, _which_, properly an interrogative, appears commonly as
a relative, both with personal and impersonal antecedents, e.g.
_Alceone... ~which~... him loveth_ XII _a_ 3 ff.; _þat steede... fro
~whilke~ þe feende fell_ XVI 13 f. Under the influence of French
_lequel_, &c., _which_ is often compounded with the article _þe_, e.g.
_a gret serpent... ~the which~ Bardus anon up drouh_ XII _b_ 72 f.; _no
thing of newe, in ~the whiche~ the hereres myghten hauen... solace_ IX
275 f. Further compounding with _þat_ is not uncommon, e.g. _the queen
of Amazoine, ~the whiche þat~ maketh hem to ben kept in cloos_ IX 190 f.
More restricted is the relative use of _whos_, _whom_, which are
originally interrogatives, though both are found very early in ME. as
personal relatives. Examples of the objective after prepositions are:
_my Lady, of ~quom~..._ VI 93; _God, fro ~whom~ ..._ IX 328 f.; _my
Sone... in ~whome~_ XVI 81 f. The possessive occurs in _Seynt Magne...
yn ~whos~ wurschyp_ I 90 f.; _I am ... the same, ~whos~ good_ XII _b_ 78
f.; and, compounded with the article, in _Morpheüs, ~the whos~ nature_
XII _a_ 113. The nominative _who_ retains its interrogative meaning,
e.g. _But ~who~ ben more heretikis?_ XI _b_ 77 f.; or is used as an
indefinite, e.g. _a tasse of grene stickes... to selle, ~who that~ wolde
hem beie_ XII _b_ 22 ff.; but it is never used as a relative; and
probably _what_ in XVI 174 is better taken as in apposition to _myghtis_
than as a true relative.
§ 13. VERB. Syntactically the most interesting point in the history of
the ME. verb is the development of the compound tenses with _have_,
_be_, _will_, _shall_, _may_, _might_, _mun_, _can_, _gan_. But the
flexional forms of the simple tenses are most subject to local
variation, and, being relatively common, afford good evidence of
dialect. Throughout the period, despite the crossings and confusions
that are to be expected in a time of uncertainty and experiment, the
distinction between strong and weak verbs is maintained; and it will be
convenient to deal first with the inflexions common to both classes, and
then to notice the forms peculiar to one or the other.
(i) #The Infinitive# had already in Northumbrian OE. lost final _-n_:
_drīfa_ 'to drive'. Hence in ME. of the North and N. Midlands the
ending is _-e_, which becomes silent at varying rates during the
fourteenth century; e.g. _dryue_ I 171, _to luf_ IV _a_ 17. In the South
and S. Midlands the common ending is _-e_, e.g. _telle_ III 3, which
usually remains syllabic to the end of the century; but _-(e)n_ is also
found, especially in verse to make a rime or to avoid hiatus: e.g.
_sein_ (: _aȝein_) XII _a_ 27; _to parte and ȝiven half his good_
XII _b_ 201.
(ii) #The Present Participle# (OE. _drīfende_) in the North and N.
Midlands ends in _-and(e)_, though _-yng(e)_, _-ing(e)_ is beginning to
appear in V, VII, XVI, XVII. In S. Midlands the historical ending
_-ende_ still prevails in Gower; but Chaucer has more commonly
_-yng(e)_; and in IX, XI, both late texts, only _-yng(e)_ appears. In
the South _-yng(e)_ is established as early as the beginning of the
century, e.g. in II.
N.B. Carefully distinguish the verbal noun which always ends in
_-yng(e)_. Early confusion resulted in the transference of this ending
to the participle.
(iii) #Present Indicative.#
(_a_) Singular: OE. 1 _drīfe_, 2 _drīf(e)s(t)_, 3 _drīf(e)ð_
(late Northumbrian _drīfes_).
In ME. _-e_, _-est_, _-eþ_ are still the regular endings for the South
and most of the Midlands. Shortened forms like _fint_ = _findeþ_ II 239;
_stant_ = _standeþ_ XII _a_ 74 are commonest in the South, where in OE.
they were a feature of West Saxon and Kentish as distinguished from
Anglian. Distinct are the Northern and N. Midland _mas(e)_ 'makes',
_tas_ 'takes', with contracted infinitives _ma_, _ta_; and _bus_
'behoves', which Chaucer uses in his imitation of Northern English,
_Reeves Tale_ 172.
In N. Midlands the modern 3rd sg. _-(e)s_ is common (V, VI, but not in
earlier I). Farther North it is invariable (IV, X, XVI, XVII). The
distribution of _-es_ as the ending of the 2nd sg. is the same, and it
is extended even to the 1st person.
(_b_) Plural: OE. _drīfað_ (late Northumbrian _drīfas_).
Only Southern ME. retains the OE. inflexion as _-eþ_ (II, III, XIII).
The Midland ending, whence the modern form derives, is _-e(n)_; though
in the N. Midlands _-es_ occasionally appears. Northern has regularly
_-es_, _unless the personal pronoun immediately precedes_, when the
ending is _-e_, as in the Midlands, e.g. _þei make_ XVI 103.
N.B. In applying this test, care must be taken to exclude inversions,
which are subject to special rules; to distinguish the subjunctive (e.g.
_falle_ XIII _a_ 52, _drawe_ XIII _b_ 6) from the indicative; and,
generally, to choose examples that are syntactically free from doubt,
because concord of number is not always logical in ME.