Image0071

EARLY MODERN ENGLISH GRAMMAR

The major shifis in English grammatical structurc wcrc ovcr by the time of the Renaissancc (p. 44); buc even a casual glancc at texts from the period shows chat many imporcanc changes wcrc continuing to cake place, although ofa morę limiced kind. For cxamplc, sevcral fcaturcs of verb use show differences from today: ‘My lifc is run his compass’, says Cassius {Juliut Caesar, V.iii.25), where today we should say has run-and this scntcncc also illustrates one. of the pronoun uses typical of che time. Constructions involving a double negative (I cannot go no fimher) wcrc commonplacc; there are still signs of itnpersonal vcrbs [mc thinks he did); and during che period a number of verb inflections (e.g.pleaseth, knowst, spake) fel! out of standard use (for other examplcs, sec pp. 63,65).

There wcrc also significant stylistic developments in senrence scrucrurc (p. 214). In Caxton and Malor)', the senterices tend co be looscand iincar, with rcpcaccd and or r/zewcoordination, and a limired amouncofsubordi-narion, mosdy introduced by which or that. Here is a typical sentencc, taken from Caxron’s proiogue to the Gołden Legend (for other cxtracts, sec pp. 57-8).

And 1 shal praye for diem vnto Aimyghty God cha: he of his benygne grace rewarde chctn ccc., and thar i: prouftyte to alle them chat shal rede or here ir redde, and may encreacc in chcm vcmie and expel!e sycę and syr.ne thac by the cnsaumple of the hoiy sayntes amende clteyr lyuyng here in thys shone lyf rhat by their metytes chey ar.d I may comc to eYerlasryng lyf and blyssc in heuen.

The influence of Latin syntactic style on English became marked in che I6th centur)'. Cicero in paruc-ular was much imicaccd. There is a morę complex use of subordination, and a scarch for rhetorical contrasc and balance, as is shown by this cxtraa from William Camdens Remaines Concernir.gBritain (1605):

.As for the Monotjllabletso :ife in our rongtie which were not so originally, although they are vnftrring fbrversesand mea-sures, yeL ate they mosc ftt for expressing briefly the first con-ceipts of che minde, or Intmńnnalia as diey caJJ them in schooles: so rh.ir we can set downe morę matccr in fcwer lincs, rhan any other language.

The awkwardness or uncercaincy which a modern reatler often feels in readingcarly Renaissancc prose is chicfly a consequence of the way writers were begin-ning co explore the potential of che languagc for com-plcx scntcncc construction (p. 226). There was conscious cxpcrimentation with new grammatical pat-rerns, supported by an incrcasingly standardized punc-tuation system {p. 68). New conjunctions emerged: because, fot example, first appears in Chaucer, but for (that) remained the norma! way of expressing cause

uncil che eariy 17th cenrury. Participial constructions became cxtrcmely common, and added grcatly to the lengrh of senrences which, in che morę complex writers, might run to 20 lines or morę. In the eariy period, such scntcnccs often appear incomplctc or ill-formcd to modern cycs (failingin concord, forexamplc, ordis-playing an unartached stibordinate clause); bur ir is important to appreciate that at the time such yariabil-ity was normal. By the 17th ccntury', however, highly sophisticated and carefully crafted scntcnccs, follow-ing a varicty of Łacin modcls, wcrc commonplacc, as can be scen in the writing of John Lyly, Philip Sidncy, and John Milcon.

The Acadcmy issuc

\uthors such as Swift wcrc dccply worried about the speed at which the languagc was changing. Widiout proper Controls, would their workstill be intelligible in a generation or so? In ‘A Proposal for Corrccting, Improving and Ascertaining the English Tonguc’ (1712), Swift presented his casc:

if it [English ] were once refincd co a certain Standard, per-haps there might be Ways fonnd out to fix ii for cver; or at least rill we are invaded and madę a Conauest by some other State; and cven then our besr Writings might probably be preserved with Care. and grow in Esteem, and che Authors have a Giance for Itmnottalicy.

Hc submitted his proposal to the Earl of Oxford:

Mv Lord; I do herc, in the Name of ał) the I.earned and Politc Persons of rhe Nation, complain ro Yout LORD-SHIP, as First Minister, dtat our languagc is octrcmcly imperfect; that i te daily Improvcments are by no mcans in proportion ro its daily Corruptions; thac die Precenders to polislt and refine it, havc chicfly muliiplied Abuses and Absurdities; and, diat in many Instances, it offends against every Part of Grammar.

Swift attackcd in nil directions: hc was against Restora-tion licentiousncss, tlie sloppiness of the young nobil-ity, the abbrcviations used by pocts, the spelling proposals which tried to rcflect speech, the fashionable slang of university pcoplc -‘illitcrate Court-Fops, half-wictcd Pocts, and Univcrsity-Boys’. His solution was ro follow the cxample of the Frcnch (whose Acadcmy was founded in 1635):

a fiee judicious Choice should be madę of such Persons, as aro pcncralty allowed to be best qualified for such a Work, without any regard to Quaiicy, Parry, or Profession. These, to a certain Number ar least, should assemblc at some appoinceć Time and Place, and fix on Rules by which diey

design to proceed____what I have most ar Heart is, dra: some

Method should be thougluon for ascertainingassd fixingwt 1-inguage for e\’er, after such Aiterations arc madę in it as shall bc dtought rcquisitc. Por I ani of Opinion, that i: is better a Languagc should not be wholly pcrfect, dian that ir should bc pcrpctualiy changing...

Swift was not the first person to propose an Acadcmy for English: Dryden and Defoe had also donc so. But even though the idea attracted a great deal of interest, it nevcr got off the ground. Many saw that languagc cannot bc kept static, and that standnrds always changc. Dr Johnson was one who deridcd the nodon:

When we sec men grow old and die at a certain time one after anotker, we Iaugh at the elixir rhat promises to prolong lift to a thousand ycars; and widi equal iusrice may the l=xi-eographer bc deridcd, who being ablc to produce no exam-ple of a nation thar has prcserved their words and phrases from muiability, sliall iinaginc that his dictionary can : etnbalm his languagc, and secure it from corruption and . deciy...    _

Ncither Britain nor the United States (p. 81) chose tlie Acadcmy solution; and although die idea has been raised at intervals cvcr sińce, it has never found widespread support wichin those nations.

The debatc about languagc corruption in the 17th century' did, however, focus public atrenrion on tlie cxistcnce of a problem and the need for a solution. If I the Ianguage needcd protcction, or at least consistcncy I and stali i li ty, these could be provided by dictionarics, gram mars, spelling guides, and pronunciation manu-als. Standards of correcrness would thereby cmerge, which all could follow. It was Johnson himself who put rhe first part of this solution into place (p. 74).