Chapter 70

AFFINITIES OF THE ENGLISH WITH THE LANGUAGES OF GERMANY AND SCANDINAVIA.

§ 30. Over and above those languages of Germany and Holland which were akin to the dialects of the Anglo-Saxons, cognate languages were spoken in Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Iceland, and the Feroe isles, i.e., in Scandinavia.

§ 31. The general collective designation for the Germanic tongues of Germany and Holland, and for the Scandinavian languages of Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Iceland, and the Feroe Isles, is taken from the name of those German tribes who, during the decline of the Roman Empire, were best known to the Romans as the _Goths_; the term _Gothic_ for the Scandinavian and Germanic languages, collectively, being both current and convenient.

§ 32. Of this great _stock_ of languages the Scandinavian is one _branch_; the Germanic, called also Teutonic, another.

§ 33. The Scandinavian branch of the Gothic stock comprehends, 1. The dialects of Scandinavia Proper, i.e., of Norway and Sweden; 2. of the Danish isles and Jutland; 3. of Iceland; 4. of the Feroe Isles.

§ 34. The Teutonic branch falls into three divisions:--

1. The Moeso-Gothic. 2. The High Germanic. 3. The Low Germanic.

§ 35. It is in the Moeso-Gothic that the most ancient specimen of any Gothic tongue has been preserved. It is also the Moeso-Gothic that was spoken by the conquerors of ancient Rome; by the subjects of Hermanric, Alaric, Theodoric, Euric, Athanaric, and Totila.

In the reign of Valens, when pressed by intestine wars, and by the movements of the Huns, the Goths were assisted by that emperor, and settled in the Roman province of Moesia.

Furthermore, they were converted to Christianity; and the Bible was translated into their language by their Bishop Ulphilas.

Fragments of this translation, chiefly from the Gospels, have come down to the present time; and the Bible translation of the Arian Bishop Ulphilas, in the language of the Goths of Moesia, during the reign of Valens, exhibits the earliest sample of any Gothic tongue.

§ 36. The Old High German, called also Francic[24] and Alemannic,[25] was spoken in the ninth, tenth, and eleventh centuries, in Suabia, Bavaria, and Franconia.

The Middle High German ranges from the thirteenth century to the Reformation.

§ 37. The low Germanic division, to which the Anglo-Saxon belongs, is currently said to comprise six languages, or rather four languages in different stages.

I. II.--The Anglo-Saxon and Modern English. III. The Old Saxon. IV. V.--The Old Frisian and Modern Dutch. VI.--The Platt-Deutsch, or Low German.

§ 38. _The Frisian and Dutch._--It is a current statement that the Old Frisian bears the same relation to the Modern Dutch of Holland that the Anglo-Saxon does to the English.

The truer view of the question is as follows:--

1. That a single language, spoken in two dialects, was originally common to both Holland and Friesland.

2. That from the northern of these dialects we have the Modern Frisian of Friesland.

3. From the southern, the Modern Dutch of Holland.

The reason of this refinement is as follows:--

The Modern Dutch has certain grammatical forms _older_ than those of the old Frisian; e.g., the Dutch infinitives and the Dutch weak substantives, in their oblique cases, end in -en; those of the Old Frisian in -a: the form in -en being the older.

The true Frisian is spoken in few and isolated localities. There is--

1. The Frisian of the Dutch state called Friesland.

2. The Frisian of the parish of Saterland, in Westphalia.

3. The Frisian of Heligoland.

4. The North Frisian, spoken in a few villages of Sleswick. One of the characters of the North Frisian is the possession of a dual number.

In respect to its stages, we have the Old Frisian of the Asega-bog, the Middle Frisian of Gysbert Japicx,[31] and the Modern Frisian of the present Frieslanders, Westphalians, and Heligolanders.

§ 39. _The Low German and Platt-Deutsch._--The words _Low-German_ are not only lax in their application, but they are _equivocal_; since the term has two meanings, a _general_ meaning when it signifies a division of the Germanic languages, comprising English, Dutch, Anglo-Saxon, Old Saxon, and Frisian, and a limited one when it means the particular dialects of the Ems, the Weser, and the Elbe. To avoid this the dialects in question are conveniently called by their continental name of _Platt-Deutsch_, just as in England we say _Broad_ Scotch.

§ 40. The most characteristic difference between the Saxon and Icelandic (indeed between the Teutonic and Scandinavian tongues) lies in the peculiar position of the definite article in the latter. In Saxon, the article corresponding with the modern word _the_, is _þæt_, _se_, _seó_, for the neuter, masculine, and feminine genders respectively; and these words, regularly declined, are _prefixed_ to the words with which they agree, just as is the case with the English and with the majority of languages. In Icelandic, however, the article instead of preceding, _follows_ its noun, _with which it coalesces_, having previously suffered a change in form. The Icelandic article corresponding to _þæt_, _se_, _seó_, is _hitt_, _hinn_, _hin_: from this the h is ejected, so that, instead of the regular inflection (a), we have the forms (b).

a.

_Neut._ _Masc._ _Fem._

_Sing. Nom._ Hitt Hinn Hin. _Acc._ Hitt Hinn Hina. _Dat._ Hinu Hinum Hinni. _Gen._ Hins Hins Hinnar. _Plur. Nom._ Hin Hinir Hinar. _Acc._ Hin Hina Hinar. _Dat._ Hinum Hinum Hinum. _Gen._ Hinna Hinna Hinna.

b.

_Sing. Nom._ -it -inn -in. _Acc._ -it -inn -ina (-na). _Dat._ -nu -num -inni (-nni). _Gen._ -ins -ins -innar (-nnar). _Plur. Nom._ -in -nir -nar. _Acc._ -in -na -nar. _Dat._ -num -num -num. _Gen._ -nna -nna -nna.

Whence, as an affix, in composition,

_Neut._ _Masc._ _Fem._

_Sing. Nom._ Augat Boginn Túngan. _Acc._ Augat Boginn Túnguna. _Dat._ Auganu Boganum Túngunni. _Gen._ Augans Bogans Túngunnar. _Plur. Nom._ Augun Bogarnir Túngurnar. _Acc._ Augun Bogana Túngurnar. _Dat._ Augunum Bogunum Túngunum. _Gen._ Augnanna Boganna Túngnanna.

In the Swedish, Norwegian, and Danish this peculiarity in the position of the definite article is preserved. Its origin, however, is concealed; and an accidental identity with the indefinite article has led to false notions respecting its nature. In the languages in point the i is changed into e, so that what in Icelandic is it and in, is in Danish et and en. _En_, however, as a separate word, is the numeral _one_, and also the indefinite article _a_; whilst in the neuter gender it is _et_--en sol, _a sun_; et bord, _a table_: solon, _the sun_; bordet, _the table_. From modern forms like those just quoted, it has been imagined that the definite is merely the indefinite article transposed. This it is not.

To apply an expression of Mr. Cobbet's, _en_ = _a_, and -en = _the_, are _the same combination of letters, but not the same word_.

§ 41. Another characteristic of the Scandinavian language is the possession of a _passive_ form, or a _passive_ voice, ending in -st:--_ek_, _þu_, _hann brennist_ = _I am_, _thou art_, _he is burnt_; _ver brennumst_ = _we are burnt_; _þér brennizt_ = _ye are burnt_; _þeir brennast_ = _they are burnt_. Past tense, _ek_, _þu_, _hann brendist_; _ver brendumst_, _þér brenduzt_, _þeir brendust_. Imperat.: _brenstu_ = _be thou burnt_. Infinit.: _brennast_ = _to be burnt_.

In the modern Danish and Swedish, the passive is still preserved, but without the final t. In the _older_ stages of Icelandic, on the other hand, the termination was not -st but -sc; which -sc grew out of the reflective pronoun _sik_. With these phenomena the Scandinavian languages give us the evolution and development of a passive voice; wherein we have the following series of changes:--1. the reflective pronoun coalesces with the verb, whilst the sense changes from that of a reflective to that of a middle verb; 2. the c changes to t, whilst the middle sense passes into a passive one; 3. t is dropped from the end of the word, and the expression that was once reflective then becomes strictly passive.

Now the Saxons have no passive voice at all. That they should have one _originating_ like that of the Scandinavians was impossible, inasmuch as they had no reflective pronoun, and, consequently, nothing to evolve it from.

* * * * *