PART VII.

THE DIALECTS OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.

s. 678. The consideration of the dialects of the English language is best taken in hand after the historical investigation of the elements of the English population. For this, see Part I.

It is also best taken in hand after the analysis of the grammatical structure of the language. For this, see Part IV.

This is because both the last-named subjects are necessary as preliminaries. The structure of the language supplies us with the points in which one dialect may differ from another, whilst the history of the immigrant populations may furnish an ethnological reason for such differences as are found to occur.

For a further illustration of this see pp. 4, 5.

s. 679. By putting together the history of the migrations into a country, and the grammatical structure of the language which they introduced, we find that there are two methods of classifying the dialects. These may be called the ethnological, and the structural methods.

According to the former, we place in the same class those dialects which were introduced by the same section of immigrants. Thus, a body of Germans, starting from the same part of Germany, and belonging to the same section of the Germanic population, even if, whilst at sea, they separated into two, three, or more divisions, and landed upon widely separated portions of Great Britain, would introduce dialects which were allied _ethnologically_; even though, by one of them changing rapidly, and the others not changing at all, they might, in their external characters, differ from each other, and agree with dialects of a different introduction. Hence, the ethnological principle is essentially historical, and {532} is based upon the idea of _affiliation_ or affinity in the way of descent.

The _structural_ principle is different. Two dialects introduced by different sections (perhaps it would be better to say _sub_-sections) of an immigrant population may suffer similar changes; _e. g._, they may lose the same inflexions, adopt similar euphonic processes, or incorporate the same words. In this case, their external characters become mutually alike. Hence, if we take two (or move) such dialects, and place them in the same class, we do so simply because they are alike; not because they are affiliated.

Such are the two chief principles of classification. Generally, they coincide; in other words, similarity of external characters is _prim[^a] facie_ evidence of affinity in the way of affiliation, identity of origin being the safest assumption in the way of cause; whilst identity of origin is generally a sufficient ground for calculating upon similarity of external form; such being, _a priori_, its probable effect.

Still, the evidence of one in favour of the other is only _prim[^a] facie_ evidence. Dialects of the same origin may grow unlike; dialects of different origins alike.

s. 680. The causes, then, which determine those minute differences of language, which go by the name of _dialects_ are twofold.--1. Original difference; 2. Subsequent change.

s. 681. The original difference between the two sections (or _sub_-sections) of an immigrant population are referable to either--1. Difference of locality in respect to the portion of the country from which they originated; or 2. Difference in the date of the invasion.

Two bodies of immigrants, one from the Eyder, and the other from the Scheldt, even if they left their respective localities on the same day of the same month, would most probably differ from one another; and that in the same way that a Yorkshireman differs from a Hampshire man.

On the other hand, two bodies of immigrants, each leaving the very same locality, but one in 200 A.D., and the other in 500 A.D., would also, most probably, differ; and that as a Yorkshireman of 1850 A.D. differs from one of 1550 A.D. {533}

s. 682. The subsequent changes which may affect the dialect of an immigrant population are chiefly referable to either, 1. Influences exerted by the dialects of the aborigines of the invaded country; 2. Influences of simple growth, or development. A dialect introduced from Germany to a portion of Great Britain, where the aborigines spoke Gaelic, would (if affected at all by the indigenous dialect) be differently affected from a dialect similarly circumstanced in a British, Welsh, and Cambrian district.

A language which changes rapidly, will, at the end of a certain period, wear a different aspect from one which changes slowly.

s. 683. A full and perfect apparatus for the minute philology of the dialects of a country like Great Britain, would consist in--

1. The exact details of the present provincialisms.

2. The details of the history of each dialect through all its stages.

3. The exact details of the provincialisms of the whole of that part of Germany which contributed, or is supposed to have contributed, to the Anglo-Saxon immigration.

4. The details of the original languages or dialects of the Aboriginal Britons at the time of the different invasions.

This last is both the least important and the most unattainable.

s. 684. Such are the preliminaries which are wanted for the purposes of investigation. Others are requisite for the proper understanding of the facts already ascertained, and the doctrines generally admitted; the present writer believing that these two classes are by no means coextensive.

Of such preliminaries, the most important are those connected with 1. the structure of language, and 2. the history of individual documents; in other words, certain points of philology, and certain points of bibliography.

s. 685. _Philological preliminaries._--These are points of pronunciation, points of grammatical structure, and glossarial peculiarities. It is only the first two which will be noticed. They occur in 1. the modern, 2. the ancient local forms of speech. {534}

s. 686. _Present provincial dialects._--In the way of grammar we find, in the present provincial dialects (amongst many others), the following old forms--

1. A plural in _en_--_we call-en_, _ye call-en_, they _call-en_. Respecting this, the writer in the Quarterly Review, has the following doctrine:--

"It appears to have been popularly known, if not in East Anglia proper, at all events in the district immediately to the westward, since we find it in Orm, in an Eastern-Midland copy of the Rule of Nuns, saec. XIII., and in process of time in Suffolk. Various conjectures have been advanced as to the origin of this form, of which we have no certain examples before the thirteenth century.[72] We believe the true state of the case to have been as follows. It is well known that the Saxon dialects differ from the Gothic, Old-German, &c. in the form of the present indicative plural--making all three persons to end in _-ath_ or _-ad_;_--we--[gh]e--hi--lufi-ath_ (_-ad_). Schmeller and other German philologists observe that a nasal has been here elided, the true ancient form being _-and_, _-ant_, or _-ent_. Traces of this termination are found in the Cotton MS. of the Old Saxon Evangelical Harmony, and still more abundantly in the popular dialects of the Middle-Rhenish district from Cologne to the borders of Switzerland. These not only exhibit the full termination _-ent_, but also two modifications of it, one dropping the nasal and the other the dental. _E.g._:--

Pres. Indic. Plur. 1, 2, 3 liebent; " " lieb-et; " " lieb-en;

--the last exactly corresponding with the Mercian. It is remarkable that none of the above forms appear in classical German compositions, while they abound in the Miracle-plays, vernacular sermons, and similar productions of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, specially addressed to the uneducated classes. We may, therefore, reasonably conclude from analogy that similar forms were popularly current in our midland counties, gradually insinuating themselves into the {535} written language. We have plenty of examples of similar phenomena. It would be difficult to find written instances of the pronouns _scho_, or _she_, _their_, _you_, the auxiliaries _sal_, _suld_, &c., before the twelfth century; but their extensive prevalence in the thirteenth proves that they must have been popularly employed somewhere even in times which have left us no documentary evidence of their existence."

I prefer to consider this termination as _-en_, a mere extension of the subjunctive form to the indicative.

2. An infinitive form in _-ie_; as to _sowie_, to _reapie_,--Wiltshire. (Mr. Guest).

3. The participial form in _-and_; as _goand_, _slepand_,--Lincolnshire (?), Northumberland, Scotland.

4. The common use of the termination _-th_ in the third person present; _goeth_, _hath_, _speaketh_,--Devonshire.

5. Plural forms in _-en_; as _housen_,--Leicestershire and elsewhere.

6. Old preterite forms of certain verbs; as,

_Clom_, from _climb_, Hereford and elsewhere. _Hove_, -- _heave_, ditto. _Puck_, -- _pick_, ditto. _Shuck_, -- _shook_, ditto. _Squoze_, -- _squeeze_, ditto. _Shew_, -- _sow_, Essex. _Rep_, -- _reap_, ditto. _Mew_, -- _mow_, ditto, &c.

The following changes (a few out of many) are matters not of grammar, but of pronunciation:--

Ui for _oo_--_cuil_, _bluid_, for _cool_, _blood_,--Cumberland, Scotland.

Oy for _i_--_foyne_, _twoyne_, for _fine_, _twine_,--Cheshire, Cambridgeshire, Suffolk.

Oy for _oo_--_foyt_ for _foot_,--Halifax.

Oy for _o_--_noite_, _foil_, _coil_, _hoil_, for _note_, _foal_, _coal_, _hole_,--Halifax.

Oy for _a_--_loyne_ for _lane_,--Halifax.

Ooy for _oo_--_nooin_, _gooise_, _fooil_, _tooil_, for _noon_, _goose_, _fool_, _tool_,--Halifax. {536}

W inserted (with or without a modification)--as _spwort_, _scworn_, _whoam_, for _sport_, _scorn_, _home_,--Cumberland, West Riding of Yorkshire.

Ew for _oo_, or _yoo_--_tewn_ for _tune_,--Suffolk, Westmoreland.

Iv for _oo_, or _yoo_ when a vowel follows--as _Samivel_ for _Samuel_; _Emmanivel_ for _Emmanuel_. In all these we have seen a tendency to _diphthongal_ sounds.

In the following instances the practice is reversed, and instead of the vowel being made a diphthong, the diphthong becomes a vowel, as,

O for _oy_--_boh_ for _boy_, Suffolk, &c.

Oo for _ow_--_broon_ for _brown_,--Bilsdale.

Ee for _i_--_neet_ for _night_,--Cheshire.

O for _ou_--_bawn'_ for _bound_,--Westmoreland.

Of these the substitution of _oo_ for _ow_, and of _ee_ for _i_, are of importance in the questions of the Appendix.

[=E][=e] for _a_--_theere_ for _there_,--Cumberland.

[=E][=e] for _[)e]_--_reed_, _seeven_, for _red_, _seven_,--Cumberland, Craven.

[=A] for _[=o]_--_sair_, _mair_, _baith_, for _sore_, _more_, _both_,--Cumberland, Scotland.

[)A] for _[)o]_--_saft_ for _soft_,--Cheshire.

O for _[)a]_--_mon_ for _man_,--Cheshire. _Lond_ for _land_,--East-Anglian Semi-Saxon.

_Y_ inserted before a vowel--_styake_, _ryape_, for _stake_, _rope_,--Borrowdale; especially after _g_ (a point to be noticed), _gyarden_, _gyown_, for _garden_, _gown_,--Warwickshire, &c.; and at the beginning of a word, as _yat_, _yan_, for _ate_, _one_ (_ane_),--Westmoreland, Bilsdale.

_H_ inserted--_hafter_, _hoppen_, for _after_, _open_,--Westmoreland, &c.

_H_ omitted--_at_, _ard_, for _hat_, _hard_,--_Passim_.

_Transition of Consonants._

_B_ for _v_--_Whitehebbon_ for _Whitehaven_,--Borrowdale.

_P_ for _b_--_poat_ for _boat_.--Welsh pronunciation of many English words. See the speeches of Sir Hugh Evans in Merry Wives of Windsor.

_V_ for _f_--_vind_ for _find_,--characteristic of Devonshire, Kent. {537}

_T_ for _d_ (final)--_deet_ for _deed_,--Borrowdale.

_T_ for _ch_ (_tsh_)--_fet_ for _fetch_,--Devonshire.

_D_ for _j_ (_dzh_)--_sled_ for _sledge_,--Hereford.

_D_ for _th_ (_th_)--_wid_=_with_; _tudder_=_the other_,--Borrowdale, Westmoreland. Initial (especially before a consonant)--_drash_, _droo_=_thrash_, _through_,--Devonshire, Wilts.

_K_ for _ch_ (_tsh_)--_thack_, _pick_, for _thatch_, _pitch_,--Westmoreland, Lincolnshire, Halifax.

_G_ for _j_ (_dzh_)--_brig_ for _bridge_--Lincolnshire, Hereford.

_G_ preserved from the Anglo-Saxon--_lig_, _lie_. Anglo-Saxon, _licgan_,--Lincolnshire, North of England.

_Z_ for _s_--_zee_ for _see_,--Devonshire.

_S_ for _sh_--_sall_ for _shall_,--Craven, Scotland.

_Y_ for _g_--_yet_ for _gate_,--Yorkshire, Scotland.

_W_ for _v_--_wiew_ for _view_,--Essex, London.

_N_ for _ng_--_bleedin_ for _bleeding_,--Cumberland, Scotland.

_Sk_ for _sh_--_busk_ for _bush_,--Halifax.

_Ejection of Letters._

_K_ before _s_, the preceding vowel being lengthened by way of compensation--_neist_ for _next_, _seist_ for _sixth_,--Halifax.

_D_ and _v_ after a consonant--_gol_ for _gold_, _siller_ for _silver_,--Suffolk. The ejection of _f_ is rarer; _mysel_ for _myself_, however, occurs in most dialects.

_L_ final, after a short vowel,--in which case the vowel is lengthened--_poo_ for _pull_,--Cheshire, Scotland.

_Al_ changed to _a_ open--_hawf_ for _half_, _saumo_n for _salmon_,--Cumberland, Scotland.

_Transposition._

Transpositions of the liquid _r_ are common in all our provincial dialects; as _gars_, _brid_, _perty_, for _grass_, _bird_, _pretty_. Here the provincial forms are the oldest, _gaers_, _brid_, &c., being the Anglo-Saxon forms. Again; _acsian_, Anglo-Saxon=_ask_, English.

s. 687. _Ancient forms of speech._--In the way of grammar--

1. The _ge-_ (see s. 409), prefixed to the past participle (_ge-boren_=_borne_) is, in certain localities,[73] omitted.

{538}

2. The present[74] plural form _-s_, encroaches upon the form in _-n_. Thus, _munuces_=_munucan_=_monks_.

3. The infinitive ends in _-a_, instead of _-an_. This is Scandinavian, but it is also Frisian.

4. The particle _at_ is used instead of _to_ before the infinitive verb.

5. The article[74] _the_ is used instead of _se_, _seo_, _thaet_=[Greek: ho, he, to], for both the numbers, and all the cases and genders.

6. The form in _-s_ (_use_, _usse_) replaces _ure_=_our_.

In the way of sound--

1. Forms with the slenderer, or more vocalic[74] sounds, replace forms which in the West-Saxon are broad or diphthongal.[75] Beda mentions that _Coelin_ is the Northumbrian form of _Ceawlin_.

2. The simple[74] sound of _k_ replaces the combination out of which the modern sound of _ch_ has been evolved.

3. The sound of _sk_ replaces either the _sh_, or the sound out of which it has been evolved.

The meaning of these last two statements is explained by the following extract: "Another characteristic is the infusion of Scandinavian words, of which there are slight traces in monuments of the tenth century, and strong and unequivocal ones in those of the thirteenth and fourteenth. Some of the above criteria may be verified by a simple and obvious process, namely, a reference to the topographical nomenclature of our provinces. Whoever takes the trouble to consult the Gazetteer of England will find, that of our numerous 'Carltons' not one is to be met with south of the Mersey, west of the Staffordshire Tame, or south of the Thames; and that 'Fiskertons,' 'Skiptons,' 'Skelbrookes,' and a whole host of similar names are equally _introuvables_ in the same district. They are, with scarcely a single exception, northern or eastern; and we know from Aelfric's Glossary, from Domesday and the Chartularies, that this distinction of pronunciation was established as early as the eleventh century. 'Kirby' or 'Kirkby,' is a specimen of joint Anglian and {539} Scandinavian influence, furnishing a clue to the ethnology of the district wherever it occurs. The converse of this rule does not hold with equal universality, various causes having gradually introduced soft palatal sounds into districts to which they did not properly belong. Such are, however, of very partial occurrence, and form the exception rather than the rule."--_Quarterly Review_, No. CLXIV.

_Bibliographical preliminaries._--The leading facts here are the difference between 1. the locality of the authorship, and 2, the locality of the transcription of a book.

Thus: the composition of a Devonshire poet may find readers in Northumberland, and his work be transcribed by Northumbrian copyist. Now this Northumbrian copyist may do one of two things: he may transcribe the Devonian production _verbatim et literatim_; in which case his countrymen read the MS. just as a Londoner reads Burns, _i.e._, in the dialect of the writer, and not in the dialect of the reader. On the other hand, he may _accommodate_ as well as transcribe, _i.e._, he may change the _non_-Northumbrian into Northumbrian expressions, in which case his countrymen read the MS. in their own rather than the writer's dialect.

Now it is clear, that in a literature where transcription, _combined with accommodation_, is as common as _simple_ transcription, we are never sure of knowing the dialect of an author unless we also know the dialect of his transcriber. In no literature is there more of this _semi_-translation than in the Anglo-Saxon and the early English; a fact which sometimes raises difficulties, by disconnecting the evidence of authorship with the otherwise natural inferences as to the dialect employed; whilst, at others, it smoothes them away by supplying as many specimens of fresh dialects, as there are extant MSS. of an often copied composition.

Inquiring whether certain peculiarities of dialect in Layamon's Brut, really emanated from the author, a writer in the Quarterly Review, (No. clxiv.) remarks, that to decide this it "would be necessary to have access either to the priest's autograph, or to a more faithful copy of it than it was the practice to make either in his age or the succeeding {540} ones. A transcriber of an early English composition followed his own ideas of language, grammar, and orthography; and if he did not entirely obliterate the characteristic peculiarities of his original, he was pretty sure, like the Conde de Olivares, 'd'y meter beaucour du sein.' The practical proof of this is to be found in the existing copies of those works, almost every one of which exhibits some peculiarity of features. We have 'Trevisa' and 'Robert of Gloucester,' in two distinct forms--'Pier's Ploughman,' in at least three, and 'Hampole's Pricke of Conscience,' in half a dozen, without any absolute certainty which approximates most to what the authors wrote. With regard to Layamon, it might be supposed that the older copy is the more likely to represent the original; but we have internal evidence that it is not the priest's autograph; and it is impossible to know what alterations it may have undergone in the course of one or more transcriptions."

Again, in noticing the orthography of the Ormulum (alluded to in the present volume, s. 266), he writes: "It is true that in this instance we have the rare advantage of possessing the author's autograph, a circumstance which cannot with confidence be predicated of any other considerable work of the same period. The author was, moreover, as Mr. Thorpe observes, a kind of critic in his own language; and we therefore find in his work, a regularity of orthography, grammar, and metre, hardly to be paralleled in the same age. All this might, in a great measure, disappear in the very next copy; for fidelity of transcription was no virtue of the thirteenth or the fourteenth century; at least with respect to vernacular works. It becomes, therefore, in many cases a problem of no small complication, to decide with certainty respecting the original metre, or language, of a given mediaeval composition, with such data as we now possess."

From all this it follows, that the inquirer must talk of _copies_ rather than of _authors_.

s. 688. _Caution._--Differences of spelling do not always imply differences of pronunciation; perhaps they may be _prim[^a] facie_ of such. Still it is uncritical to be over-hasty in {541} separating, as specimens of _dialect_, works which, perhaps, only differ in being specimens of separate _orthographies_.

s. 689. _Caution._--The accommodation of a transcribed work is susceptible of _degrees_. It may go so far as absolutely to replace one dialect by another, or it may go no farther than the omission of the more unintelligible expressions, and the substitution of others more familiar. I again quote the Quarterly Review,--"There are very few matters more difficult than to determine _[`a] priori_, in what precise form a vernacular composition of the thirteenth century might be written, or what form it might assume in a very short period. Among the Anglo-Saxon charters of the eleventh and twelfth centuries, many are modelled upon the literary Anglo-Saxon, with a few slight changes of orthography and inflection; while others abound with dialectical peculiarities of various sorts. Those peculiarities may generally be accounted for from local causes. An East-Anglian scribe does not employ broad western forms, nor a West of England man East-Anglian ones; though each might keep his provincial peculiarities out of sight, and produce something not materially different from the language of Aelfric."

s. 690. _Caution._--In the Reeve's Tale, Chaucer puts into the mouth of one of his north-country clerks, a native of the Strother, in the north-west part of the deanery of Craven, where the Northumbrian dialect rather preponderates over the Anglian, certain Yorkshire glosses. "Chaucer[76] undoubtedly copied the language of some native; and the general accuracy, with which he gives it, shows that he was an attentive observer of all that passed around him.

"We subjoin an extract from the poem, in order to give our readers an opportunity of comparing southern and northern English, as they co-existed in the fifteenth century. It is from a MS. that has never been collated; but which we believe to be well worthy the attention of any future editor of the Canterbury Tales. The italics denote variations from the printed text:--

{542}

"John highte that oon and Aleyn highte that other: Of _oo_ toun were thei born that highte Strother, Ffer in the north I can not tellen where. This Aleyn maketh redy al his gere-- And on an hors the sak he caste anoon. Fforth goth Aleyn the clerk and also John, With good swerde and bokeler by his side. John knewe the weye--hym nedes no gide; And atte melle the sak a down he layth. Aleyn spak first: Al heyle, Symond--in fayth-- How fares thi fayre daughter and thi wyf? Aleyn welcome--quod Symkyn--be my lyf-- And John also--how now, what do ye here? By God, quod John--Symond, nede has _na_ pere. Hym bihoves _to_ serve him self that has na swayn; Or _ellis_ he is a fool as clerkes sayn. Oure maunciple I hope he wil be ded-- Swa _werkes hym_ ay the wanges in his heed. And therefore is I come and eek Aleyn-- To grynde oure corn, and carye it _ham_ agayne, I pray yow _spedes_[77] us _hethen_ that ye may. It shal be done, quod Symkyn, by my fay! What wol ye done while it is in hande? By God, right by the hoper wol I stande, Quod John, and see _how gates_ the corn gas inne; _Yit_ saugh I never, by my fader kynne, How that the hoper wagges til and fra! Aleyn answerde--John wil _ye_ swa? Than wil I be bynethe, by my crown, And se _how gates_ the mele falles down In til the trough--that sal be my disport. _Quod John_--In faith, I is of youre sort-- I is as ille a meller as _are_ ye. * * * * * * And when the mele is sakked and ybounde, This John goth out and fynt his hors away-- And gan to crie, harow, and wele away!-- Our hors is lost--Aleyn, for Godde's banes, Stepe on thi feet--come of man attanes! Allas, oure wardeyn has his palfrey lorn! This Aleyn al forgat bothe mele and corn-- {543} Al was out of his mynde, his housbonderie. What--whilke way is he goon? he gan to crie. The wyf come lepynge _in_ at a ren; She saide--Allas, youre hors goth to the fen With wylde mares, as faste as he may go. Unthank come on this hand that _band_ him so-- And he that _bet_ sholde have knet the reyne. Alas! quod John, Alayn, for Criste's peyne, Lay down thi swerde, and I _wil_ myn alswa; I is ful _swift_--God wat--as is a ra-- By Goddes _herte_ he sal nought scape us bathe. Why ne hadde thou put the capel in the lathe? Il hayl, by God, Aleyn, thou _is_ fonne."

"Excepting the obsolete forms _hethen_ (hence), _swa_, _lorn_, _whilke_, _alswa_, _capel_--all the above provincialisms are still, more or less, current in the north-west part of Yorkshire. _Na_, _ham_(e), _fra_, _banes_, _attanes_, _ra_, _bathe_, are pure Northumbrian. _Wang_ (cheek or temple) is seldom heard, except in the phrase _wang tooth_, _dens molaris_. _Ill_, adj., for _bad_--_lathe_ (barn)--and _fond_ (foolish)--are most frequently and familiarly used in the West Riding, or its immediate borders."

Now this indicates a class of writings which, in the critical history of our local dialect, must be used with great caution and address. An imitation of dialect may be so lax as to let its only merit consist in a deviation from the standard idiom.

In the Lear of Shakspeare we have speeches from a Kentish clown. Is this the dialect of the character, the dialect of the writer, or is it some conventional dialect appropriated to theatrical purposes? I think the latter.

In Ben Jonson's Tale of a Tub, one (and more than one of the characters) speaks thus. His residence is the neighbourhood of London, Tottenham Court.

Is it no sand? nor buttermilk? if't be, Ich 'am no zive, or watering-pot, to draw Knots in your 'casions. If you trust me, zo-- If not, _pra_forme 't your zelves, '_C_ham no man's wife, But resolute Hilts: you'll vind me in the buttry.

_Act_ I. _Scene_ 1.

{544}

I consider that this represents the dialect of the neighbourhood of London, not on the strength of its being put in the mouth of a man of Tottenham, but from other and independent circumstances.

Not so, however, with the provincialisms of another of Ben Jonson's plays, the Sad Shepherd:--

---- shew your sell Tu all the sheepards, bauldly; gaing amang hem. Be mickle in their eye, frequent and fugeand. And, gif they ask ye of Eiarine, Or of these claithes; say that I ga' hem ye, And say no more. I ha' that wark in hand, That web upon the luime, sall gar em thinke.

_Act_ II. _Scene_ 3.

The scene of the play is Sherwood Forest: the language, however, as far as I may venture an opinion, is not the language from which the present Nottinghamshire dialect has come down.

s. 691. _Caution._--Again, the word _old_, as applied to language, has a double meaning.

The language of the United States was imported from England into America in the reign of Queen Elizabeth. The language of South Australia has been introduced within the present generation. In one sense, the American English is older than the Australian. It was earliest separated from the mother-tongue.

The language, however, of America may (I speak only in the way of illustration, and consequently hypothetically), in the course of time, become the least old of the two; the word _old_ being taken in another sense. It may change with greater rapidity. It may lose its inflections. It may depart more from the structure of the mother-tongue, and preserve fewer of its _old_ elements. In this sense the Australian (provided that it has altered least, and that it retain the greatest number of the _old_ inflections) will be the older tongue of the two.

Now what may be said of the language of two countries, may be said of the dialects of two districts. The one dialect may run its changes apace; the other alter but by degrees. {545} Hence, of two works in two such dialects, the one would appear older than the other, although in reality the two were cotemporary.

Hence, also, it is a lax expression to say that it is the old forms (the archaisms) that the provincial dialects retain. The provincial forms are archaic only when the current language changes more rapidly than the local idiom. When the local idiom changes fastest, the archaic forms belong to the standard mode of speech.

The provincial forms, _goand_, _slepand_, for _going_ and _sleeping_, are archaic. Here the archaism is with the provincial form.

The forms _almost_, _horses_, _nought but_, contrasted with the provincialisms _ommost_, _hosses_, _nobbot_, are archaic. They have not been changed so much as they will be. Here the archaism (that is, the nearer approach to the older form) is with the standard idiom. A sequestered locality is preservative of old forms. But writing and education are preservatives of them also.

s. 692. With these preliminaries a brief notice of the English dialects, in their different stages, may begin.

_The districts north of the Humber._--There is so large an amount of specimens of the dialects of this area in the Anglo-Saxon stage of our language, the area itself so closely coincides with the political division of the kingdom of Northumberland, whilst the present arrangement (more or less provisional) of the Anglo-Saxon dialects consists of the divisions of them into the, 1, West-Saxon; 2, Mercian; and 3, Northumbrian, that it is best to give a general view of the whole tract before the minuter details of the different counties which compose them are noticed. The _data_ for the Northumbrian division of the Anglo-Saxon dialects are as follows:--

1. _Wanley's Fragment of Caedmon._--The north-east of Yorkshire was the birth-place of the Anglo-Saxon monk Caedmon. Nevertheless, the form in which his poems in full have come down to us is that of a West-Saxon composition. This indicates the probability of the original work having first been re-cast, and afterwards lost. Be this as it may, the {546} following short fragment has been printed by Wanley, from an ancient MS., and by Hickes from Bede, Hist. Eccl., 4, 24, and it is considered, in the first form, to approach or, perhaps, to represent the Northumbrian of the original poem.

1. 2. _Wanley._ _Hickes._

Nu seylun hergan N['u] we sceolan herigean Herfaen-ricaes uard, Heofon-r['i]ces weard, Metudes maecti, Metodes mihte, End his modgethanc. And his m['o]dgethanc. Uerc uuldur fadur, Weorc wuldor-faeder, Sue he uundra gihuaes, Sva he wundra gewaes, Eci drictin, Ec['e] driten, Ord stelidae. Ord onstealde. He aerist scopa, Ne ['ae]rest sc['o]p, Elda barnum, Eordhan bearnum, Heben til hrofe; Heofon t['o] r['o]fe; Haleg scepen: H['a]lig scyppend: Tha mittungeard, D['a] middangeard, Moncynnaes uard, Moncynnes weard, Eci drictin, Ece drihten, Aefter tiadhae, Aefter te['o]de, Firum foldu, Firum foldan, Frea allmectig. Fre['a] almihtig.

_Translation._

Now we should praise For earth's bairns, The heaven-kingdom's preserver, Heaven to roof; The might of the Creator, Holy shaper; And his mood-thought. Then mid-earth, The glory-father of works, Mankind's home, As he, of wonders, each Eternal Lord, Eternal Lord, After formed, Originally established. For the homes of men, He erst shaped, Lord Almighty.

2. _The death-bed verses of Bede._

Fore the neidfaerae, Before the necessary journey, Naenig uuiurthit No one is Thoc-snotturra Wiser of thought Than him tharf sie Than he hath need To ymbhycganne, To consider, {547} Aer his hionongae, Before his departure, Huaet, his gastae, What, for his spirit, Godaes aeththa yflaes, Of good or evil, Aefter deothdaege, After the death-day, Doemid uuieorthae. Shall be doomed.

From a MS. at St. Gallen; quoted by Mr. Kemble, _Archaeologia_, vol. xxviii.

3. _The Ruthwell Runes._--The inscription in Anglo-Saxon Runic letters, on the Ruthwell Cross, is thus deciphered and translated by Mr. Kemble:--

. . . . . . . mik. . . . . . . me. Riiknae kyningk The powerful King, Hifunaes hlafard, The Lord of Heaven, Haelda ic ne daerstae. I dared not hold. Bismerede ungket men, They reviled us two, B[^a] aetgaed[r]e, Both together, Ik (n)idhbaedi bist(e)me(d) I stained with the pledge of crime. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . geredae . . . . prepared Hinae gamaeldae Himself spake Estig, dha he walde Benignantly when he would An galgu gist[^i]ga Go up upon the cross, M[^o]dig fore Courageously before Men, . . . . . Men . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mid stralum giwundaed, Wounded with shafts, Alegdun hiae hinae, They laid him down, Limw[^e]rigne. Limb-weary. Gistodun him . . . They stood by him. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Krist waes on r[^o]di; Christ was on cross. Hwedhrae ther f[^u]sae Lo! there with speed Fearran cwomu From afar came Aedhdhilae ti laenum. Nobles to him in misery. Ic that al bih (e[^o]ld) I that all beheld . . . . . sae (...) . . . . . . . . . . Ic w(ae)s mi(d) ga(l)gu I was with the cross Ae (. . . .) rod . ha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

{548}

"The dialect of these lines is that of Northumberland in the seventh, eighth, and even ninth centuries. The first peculiarity is in the _ae_ for _e_ in the oblique cases, and which I have observed in the cotemporary MS. of Cudhberht's letter at St. Gallen. This, which is strictly organic, and represents the uncorrupted Gothic genitive in _-as_, and dative in _-a_, as well as the Old Saxon forms of the substantive, is evidence of great antiquity. But that which is, perhaps, the most characteristic of the Northumbrian dialect is the formation of the infinitive in _-a_ and _-ae_, instead of _-an_ (_haeldae_, _gistiga_). The Durham Book has, I believe, throughout but one single verb, which makes the infinitive in _-an_, and that is the anomalous word _bean_=_to be_; even _wosa_ and _wiortha_ following the common rule. The word _ungket_ is another incontrovertible proof of extreme antiquity, having, to the best of my knowledge, never been found but in this passage. It is the dual of the first personal pronoun _Ic_, and corresponds to the very rare dual of the second personal pronoun _incit_, which occurs twice in Caedmon."[78]

4. _The Cotton Psalter._--This is a Latin Psalter in the Cotton collection, accompanied by an Anglo-Saxon interlineation. Place uncertain. Time, ninth century or earlier. The following points of difference between this and the West-Saxon are indicated by Mr. Garnett, Phil. Soc. No. 27.

COTTON PSALTER. WEST-SAXON.

Boen, _prayer_ Ben. Boec, _books_ B['e]c. Coelan, _cool_ C['e]lan. Doeman, _judge_ D['e]man. Foedan, _feed_ F['e]dan. Spoed, _fortune_ Sp['e]d. Swoet, _sweet_ Sw['e]t. Woenan, _think_, _ween_ W['e]nan.

5. _The Durham Gospels--Quatuor Evangelia Latine, ex translatione B. Hieronymi, cum gloss[^a] interlineat[^a] Saxonica._ Nero, D. 4.

{549}

_Matthew_, cap. 2.

midhdhy arod gecenned were haelend in dhaer byrig Cum ergo natus esset Jesus in Bethleem Judaeae

in dagum Herodes cyninges heonu dha tungulcraeftga of eustdael in diebus Herodis Regis, ecce magi ab oriente

cweodhonde cwomun to hierusalem hiu cwoedon huer is dhe acenned venerunt Hierosolymam, dicentes, Ubi est qui natus

tungul is cynig Judeunu gesegon we fordhon sterru his in est rex Judaeorum? vidimus enim stellam ejus in

eustdael and we cwomon to wordhanne hine geherde wiototlice oriente et venimus adorare eum. Audiens autem

dha burgwaeras herodes se cynig gedroefed waes and alle dha hierusolemisca midh Herodes turbatus est et omnis Hierosolyma cum

mesapreusti him and gesomnede alle dha aldormenn biscopa illo. Et congregatis (_sic_) omnes principes sacerdotum

geascode and dha udhuutta dhaes folces georne gefragnde fra him huer crist et scribas populi, sciscitabatur ab iis ubi Christus

acenned were. nasceretur.

6. _The Rituale Ecclesiae Dunhelmensis._--Edited for the Surtees Society by Mr. Stevenson. Place: neighbourhood of Durham. Time: A.D. 970. Differences between the Psalter and Ritual:--

_a._ The form for the first person is in the Psalter generally _-u_. In the Ritual it is generally _-o_. In West Saxon, _-e_.

PSALTER.--_Getreow-u_, I believe; _cleopi-u_, I call; _sell-u_, I give; _ondred-u_, I fear; _ageld-u_, I pay; _getimbr-u_, I build. Forms in _-o_; _sitt-o_, I sit; _drinc-o_, I drink.

RITUAL.--_Feht-o_, I fight; _wuldrig-o_, I glory. The ending in _-u_ is rarer.

_b._ In the West Saxon the plural present of verbs ends in _-adh_: _we lufi-adh_, _ge lufi-adh_, _hi lufi-adh_. The Psalter also exhibits this West Saxon form. But the plurals of the Ritual {550} end in _-s_: as, _bidd-as_=_we pray_; _giwoed-es_=_put on_; _wyrc-as_=_do_.

_c._ The infinitives of verbs end in the West Saxon in _-an_, as _cwed-an_=_to say_. So they do in the Psalter. But in the Ritual the _-n_ is omitted, and the infinitive ends simply in _-a_: _cuoetha_=_to say_; _inngeonga_=_to enter_.