Early Modern English

Early Modern English
English
Spoken in England, southern Scotland, Ireland, Wales and British colonies
Era developed into Modern English
Language family
Language codes
ISO 639-3

Early Modern English (EModE[1]) is the stage of the English language used from about the end of the Middle English period (the latter half of the 15th century) to 1650. Thus, the first edition of the King James Bible and the works of William Shakespeare both belong to the late phase of Early Modern English. Prior to and following the accession of James I to the English throne in 1603 the emerging English standard began to influence the spoken and written Middle Scots of Scotland.

Modern readers of English are generally able to understand Early Modern English, though occasionally difficulties arise as a result of differences in grammar, definitions of words, idiomatic expressions and spelling from modern English. The standardisation of English spelling falls within the Early Modern English period and is influenced by conventions predating the Great Vowel Shift, which is the reason for much of the non-phonetic spelling of contemporary Modern English.

Contents

Pronouns

Early Modern English has two second-person personal pronouns: thou, the informal singular pronoun, and ye, both the plural pronoun and the formal singular pronoun. This usage is analogous to the modern French tu and vous and modern southern German du and ihr, as well as Swedish du and ni. Thou was already falling out of use in the Early Modern English period, but remained customary for certain solemn occasions such as addressing God, and sometimes for addressing inferiors.

Like other personal pronouns, thou and ye have different forms dependent on their grammatical case; specifically, the objective form of thou is thee, its possessive forms are thy and thine, and its reflexive or emphatic form is thyself. The objective form of ye was you, its possessive forms are your and yours, and its reflexive or emphatic forms are yourself and yourselves.

My and thy become mine and thine before words beginning with a vowel or the letter h. More accurately, the older forms "mine" and "thine" had become "my" and "thy" before words beginning with a consonant other than "h", while "mine" and "thine" were retained before words beginning with a vowel or "h", as in mine eyes or thine hand.

Personal pronouns in Early Modern English
  Nominative Objective Genitive Possessive
1st Person singular I me my/mine[# 1] mine
plural we us our ours
2nd Person singular informal thou thee thy/thine[# 1] thine
plural or formal singular ye you your yours
3rd Person singular he/she/it him/her/it his/her/his (it)[# 2] his/hers/his[# 2]
plural they them their theirs
  1. ^ a b The possessive forms were used as genitives before words beginning with a vowel sound and letter h (e.g. thine eyes, mine heire). Otherwise, "my" and "thy" is attributive (my/thy goods) and "mine" and "thine" are predicative (they are mine/thine). Shakespeare pokes fun at this custom with an archaic plural for eyes when the character Bottom says "mine eyen" in A Midsummer Night's Dream.
  2. ^ a b From the early Early Modern English period up until the 17th century, his was the possessive of the third person neuter it as well as of the third person masculine he. Genitive "it" appears once in the 1611 King James Bible (Leviticus 25:5) as groweth of it owne accord.

Orthographic conventions

The orthography of Early Modern English was fairly similar to that of today, but spelling was unphonetic and unstable. For example, the word acuity could be spelled either <acuity> or <acuitie>. Furthermore, there were a number of features of spelling that have not been retained:

Nothing was standard, however. For example, "Julius Caesar" could be spelled "Julius Cæſar", "Ivlivs Cæſar", "Jvlivs Cæſar", or "Iulius Cæſar" and the word "he" could be spelled "he" or "hee" in the same sentence, as it is found in Shakespeare's plays.

Verbs

Marking tense and number

During the Early Modern period, English verb inflections became simplified as they evolved towards their modern forms:

Modal auxiliaries

The modal auxiliaries cemented their distinctive syntactical characteristics during the Early Modern period. Thus, the use of modals without an infinitive became rare (as in "I must to Coventry"; "I'll none of that"). The use of modals' present participles to indicate aspect (as in "Maeyinge suffer no more the loue & deathe of Aurelio" from 1556), and of their preterite forms to indicate tense (as in "he follow'd Horace so very close, that of necessity he must fall with him") also became uncommon.[11]

Some verbs ceased to function as modals during the Early Modern period. The present form of must, mot, became obsolete. Dare also lost the syntactical characteristics of a modal auxiliary, evolving a new past form (dared) distinct from the modal durst.[12]

Perfect and progressive forms

The perfect of the verbs had not yet been standardized to use uniformly the auxiliary verb "to have". Some took as their auxiliary verb "to be", as in this example from the King James Bible, "But which of you ... will say unto him ... when he is come from the field, Go and sit down..." [Luke XVII:7]. The rules that determined which verbs took which auxiliaries were similar to those still observed in German and French (see unaccusative verb).

The modern syntax used for the progressive aspect ("I am walking") became dominant by the end of the Early Modern period, but other forms were also common. These included the prefix a- ("I am a-walking") and the infinitive paired with "do" ("I do walk"). Moreover, the to be + -ing verb form could be used to express a passive meaning without any additional markers: "The house is building" could mean "The house is being built."[13]

Vocabulary

Although the language is otherwise very similar to that current, there have in time developed a few "false friends" within the English language itself, rendering difficulty in understanding even the still-prestigious phrasing of the King James Bible. An example is the passage, "Suffer the little children"; meaning, "Permit ..." (this usage of the word "suffer" is still found in some dialects in formal circumstances; it is also the source of the word "sufferance").

Development from Middle English

The change from Middle English to Early Modern English was not just a matter of vocabulary or pronunciation changing: it was the beginning of a new era in the history of English.

An era of linguistic change in a language with large variations in dialect was replaced by a new era of a more standardized language with a richer lexicon and an established (and lasting) literature. Shakespeare's plays are familiar and comprehensible today, 400 years after they were written,[14] but the works of Geoffrey Chaucer and William Langland, written only 200 years earlier, are considerably more difficult for the average reader.

Timeline

Development to Modern English

The 17th century port towns (and their forms of speech) gained in influence over the old county towns. England experienced a new period of internal peace and relative stability, encouraging the arts including literature, from around the 1690s onwards. Another important episode in the development of the English language started around 1607: the English settlement of America. By 1750, a distinct American dialect of English had developed.

There are still elements of Early Modern English in some dialects. For example, thee and thou can still be heard in the Black Country, some parts of Yorkshire and Dawley, Telford. The pronunciation of book, cook, look, etc. with a long [uː] can be heard in some areas of the North and the West Country. However, these are becoming less frequent with each generation.

See also

References

  1. ^ Río-Rey, Carmen (2002-10-09). "Subject control and coreference in Early Modern English free adjuncts and absolutes". English Language and Linguistics (Cambridge University Press) 6 (2): 309–323. http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?aid=124085. Retrieved 2009-03-12. 
  2. ^ Burroughs, Jeremiah; Greenhill, William (1660). The Saints Happinesse. http://books.google.com/?id=ByU3AAAAMAAJ.  Introduction uses both happineſs and bleſſedneſs.
  3. ^ Sacks, David (2004). The Alphabet. London: Arrow. p. 316. ISBN 0-09-943682-5. 
  4. ^ Sacks, David (2003). Language Visible. Canada: Knopf. pp. 356–57. ISBN 0-676-97487-2. 
  5. ^ W.W. Skeat, in Principles of English Etymology, claims that the o-for-u substitution was encouraged by the ambiguity between u and n; if sunne could just as easily be misread as sunue or suvne, it made sense to write it as sonne. (Skeat, Principles of English Etymology, Second Series. Clarendon Press, 1891. Page 99.)
  6. ^ Lass, Roger, ed (1999). The Cambridge History of the English Language, Volume III. Cambridge: Cambridge. p. 163. ISBN 978-0-521-26476-1. 
  7. ^ Lass, Roger, ed (1999). The Cambridge History of the English Language, Volume III. Cambridge: Cambridge. pp. 165–66. ISBN 978-0-521-26476-1. 
  8. ^ Charles Laurence Barber (1997). Early Modern English. Edinburgh University Press. p. 171. ISBN 978-07486-0835-5. 
  9. ^ Charles Laurence Barber (1997). Early Modern English. Edinburgh University Press. p. 165. ISBN 978-07486-0835-5. 
  10. ^ Charles Laurence Barber (1997). Early Modern English. Edinburgh University Press. p. 172. ISBN 978-07486-0835-5. 
  11. ^ Lass, Roger, ed (1999). The Cambridge History of the English Language, Volume III. Cambridge: Cambridge. pp. 231–35. ISBN 978-0-521-26476-1. 
  12. ^ Lass, Roger, ed (1999). The Cambridge History of the English Language, Volume III. Cambridge: Cambridge. p. 232. ISBN 978-0-521-26476-1. 
  13. ^ Lass, Roger, ed (1999). The Cambridge History of the English Language, Volume III. Cambridge: Cambridge. pp. 217–18. ISBN 978-0-521-26476-1. 
  14. ^ Cercignani, Fausto, Shakespeare's Works and Elizabethan Pronunciation, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1981.
  15. ^ Stephen L. White, "The Book of Common Prayer and the Standardization of the English Language" The Anglican, 32:2(4-11), April, 2003

External links