Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

by blending two propositions, which it would have been better to have kept distinct. The first is, that Chaucer's verses were hendecasyllabical; the second, that whether they were intended to consist of ten or eleven syllables, they were designed to be metrically correct. Dr. Nott has denied this statement in all its parts; he endeavours to show that they are not hendecasyllables, and goes on to assert that a large proportion of them cannot be read as iambick decasyllables, without doing the utmost violence to our language. It is not easy to determine between two such opposite opinions, by a comparison of all the proofs on either side, which would require (as Mr. Tyrwhitt has observed) an examination of about forty thousand verses. I have taken a shorter mode. I have tried the experiment upon those lines which have been quoted by Dr. Nott, and I find the majority of them, to my ear at least, perfectly harmonious. Mr. Tyrwhitt had selected the first eighteen verses of the Canterbury Tales as a specimen of Chaucer's poetry, as it ought to be read according to his system. Dr. Nott has, with great fairness, produced the very same, in order to exemplify his own.

"To give the reader a clear notion of what I conceive to have been Chaucer's system of versification, I will transcribe (he says) the opening lines of the Canterbury Tales, marking as well the cæsura in the middle of each verse, as the pause at the end; and also the strongly accented syllables, to shew in what manner rhythmical Decasyllabic verses were, I apprehend, recited.

[ocr errors]

1. When that April | with his shōures sòote |

2. The drought of March || had pierced to the roote |
3. And bathed ěvěry vèin || în such liquòur |
4. Of which virtùe || engendered is the flour |
5. When Zephirus èke || with his soote breath |

6. Enspired hath || în ěvěry hŏlt and heath |

7. The tender croppès H and the young sùn

half his

9. And small föwlès || mākĕn mělŏdie |
10. That sleepen all the night with open eìe |
11. So pricketh them nătùre in their couràges |
12. Then longen fòlk || to go on pilgrimages |
13. And palmĕrès || to seekěn strange strondès |
14. To serve halwès || cōuth in sundry lòndès |
15. And speciallìe || from ěvěry shirès ènd
16. Of England to Canterbury they wènd
17. The holy blissful Màrtyr || fōr to seek |

18. That them hath hòlpen || when that they were sèke""

Dr. Nott agrees with Mr. Tyrwhitt, that "the final syllables of plural nouns, and of nouns in the genitive case, as well as of participles and verbs, may, and often ought to be pronounced in Chaucer, and in all our early poets." With this concession made to us, if we place the accent, as Dr. Nott has properly marked it, on the second syllable of such words as virtue, liquóur, we shall find, I apprehend, that ten out of the eighteen lines run smoothly, without requiring the aid of Mr. Tyrwhitt's theory, which need, therefore, only be applied to the remaining eight. This, then, is the principal point at issue between them: Mr. Tyrwhitt contends that the e final, or e feminine, was anciently pronounced in such words as soote, alle, &c. As he has, I think, been very much misunderstood by Dr. Nott, I will give his own words.

"But nothing will be found of such extensive use for supplying the deficiencies of Chaucer's metre, as the pronunciation of the e feminine; and as that pronunciation has been for a long time totally antiquated, it may be proper here to suggest some reasons for believing (independently of any arguments to be drawn from the practice of Chaucer himself) that the final e in our antient language was very generally pronounced, as the e feminine is at this day by the French.

"With respect to words imported directly from France, it is certainly quite natural to suppose, that, for some time, they retained their native pronuncia

tion; whether they were Nouns substantive, as, hoste, ver. 753. face, ver. 1580, &c.—or Adjectives, as, large, ver. 755. strange, ver. 13, &c.-or Verbs, as, grante, ver. 12756. preche, ver. 12327, &c. and it cannot be doubted, that in these and other similar words in the French language, the final e was always pronounced, as it still is, so as to make them dissyllables.

"We have not indeed so clear a proof of the original pronunciation of the Saxon part of our language; but we know, from general observation, that all changes of pronunciation are usually made by small degrees; and therefore, when we find that a great number of those words, which in Chaucer's time ended in e, originally ended in a, we may reasonably presume, that our ancestors first passed from the broader sound of a to the thinner sound of e feminine, and not at once from a to e mute. Besides, if the final e in such words was not pronounced, why was it added? From the time that it has confessedly ceased to be pronounced, it has been gradually omitted in them, except where it may be supposed of use to lengthen or soften the preceding syllable, as in-hope, name, &c. But according to the ancient orthography it terminates many words of Saxon original, where it cannot have been added for any such purpose, as herte, childe, olde, wilde, &c. In these therefore we must suppose that it was pronounced as an e feminine, and made part of a second syllable; and so, by a parity of reason, in all others, in which, as in these, it appears to have been substituted for the Saxon a. Upon the same grounds we may presume, that in words terminated, according to the Saxon form, in en, such as the Infinitive modes and Plural numbers of Verbs, and a great variety of Adverbs and Prepositions, the n only was at first thrown away, and the e, which then became final, continued for a long time to be pronunced as well as written.

66

"These considerations seem sufficient to make us believe, that the pronunciation of the e feminine is founded on the very nature of both the French and Saxon parts of our language; and therefore, though we may not be able to trace the reasons of that pronunciation in all cases so plainly as in those which have been just mentioned, we may safely, I think, conclude with the learned Wallis, that what is generally considered as an e mute in our language, either at the end or in the middle of words, was anciently pronounced, but obscurely, like the e feminine of the French."

Let us now see Dr. Nott's answer.

66

Every one will admit that the final syllables of plural nouns, and of nouns in the genitive case, as well as of participles and verbs, may, and often ought to be pronounced in Chaucer, and in all our early poets. As far as this rule therefore applies, no objection can be raised to the system. But I do not see how the use of Saxon terminations can be allowed, unless the unequivocal consent of good manuscripts warrant the conclusion that Chaucer in particular cases allowed himself that licence.

"That he ever did, I doubt. Chaucer's object was to polish the language of his day. To do this he would naturally reject all words of an obsolete form, and all vulgar modes of pronunciation. That a large number of Saxon words, with their original terminations, must have then become obsolete, or have been used by the common people only, or in particular provinces, may be concluded as well from the state of the best MSS. of Chaucer, as from the history of our language. We know that the use of the English, that is of the Anglo-Saxon language, had been discouraged from the time of the Conquest, and that it had been in a great degree superseded by the general introduction of the French, which had become for nearly two centuries as well the language of polite

literature, as of the Court. The original Saxon terminations of words, therefore, must in Chaucer's time have grown greatly into disuse; consequently, were we now to introduce those terminations into Chaucer's text for the sake of gaining syllables, the probability is that we should make Chaucer counteract his own purpose; for then, instead of having polished the language of his times, he would be found to have made it appear more rude and antiquated than in reality it was.

But the principal objections to Mr. Tyrwhitt's hypothesis, omitting to urge many of minor import, are those which apply to the assumption of the 'e' feminine, without which the system, were every thing else conceded, could not stand. For, in the first place, such a mode of pronunciation would be in direct opposition to the nature and genius of our language, which, instead of dilating words for the purpose of multiplying syllables, tends to contract words as much as possible, and throws off not only final vowels, the use of which may be often doubtful, but entire syllables, even where those syllables are wanted to preserve grammatical distinction. Now it appears to me incredible that Chaucer, who was remarkable for his common sense and practical view of things, meaning to form a standard style in language, should begin by introducing a novel mode of pronunciation, which, being contrary to common usage, could not be generally adopted. In this also he would have defeated his own purpose, and would have incurred the same ridicule to which a writer of later times has exposed himself in proposing to improve the harmony of our numbers, by giving an Italian termination to our words.

[ocr errors]

A still stronger objection to this supposed use of the e' feminine rests upon a matter of fact, It is said to be similar to the use of the 'e' feminine in the French, from which, therefore, we are to consider

[blocks in formation]
« ZurückWeiter »