The English Language Part 103

The extent to which the measure _a x x_ is the basis of the stanza last quoted is concealed by the antagonism of the metre and the construction. If it were not for the axiom, that _every metre is to be considered uniform until there is proof to the contrary_, the lines might be divided thus:--

_a x, x a, x x a, x x a,_ _a x, x a x, x a x, x a,_ _a x, x a, x x a, x x a,_ _a x, x a x, x a x, x a._

The variety which arises in versification from the different degrees of the coincidence and non-coincidence between the metrical and grammatical combinations may be called _rhythm_.

-- 676. _Constant and inconstant parts of a rhythm._--See -- 636. Of the three parts or elements of a rhyme, the vowel and the part which follows the vowel are _constant_, _i.e._, they cannot be changed without changing or destroying the rhyme. In _told_ and _bold_, _plunder_, _blunder_, both the _o_ or _u_ on one side, and the _-ld_ or _-nder_ on the other are immutable.

Of the three parts, or elements, of a rhyme the part which precedes the vowel is _inconstant_, _i.e_, it must be changed in order to effect the rhyme. Thus, _old_ and _old_, _told_ and _told_, _bold_ and _bold_, do _not_ rhyme with each other; although _old_, _bold_, _told_, _scold_, &c.

do.

_Rule 1._ In two or more syllables that rhyme with each other, neither the vowel nor the sounds which _follow_ it can be _different_.

_Rule 2._ In two or more syllables that rhyme with each other, the sounds which _precede_ the vowel cannot be _alike_.

Now the number of sounds which can precede a vowel is limited: it is that of the consonants and consonantal combinations; of which a list can be made _a priori_.

_p_ _pl_ _pr_ _b_ _bl_ _br_ _f_ _fl_ _fr_ _v_ _vl_ _vr_ _t_ _tl_ _tr_ _d_ _dl_ _dr_ _th_ _thl_ _thr_ _dh_ _dhl_ _dhr_ _k_ _kl_ _kr_ _g_ _gl_ _gr_ _s_ _sp_ _sf_ _st_ _sth,_ _&c._

and so on, the combinations of s being the most complex. {530}

This gives us the following method (or receipt) for the discovery of rhymes:--

1. Divide the word to which a rhyme is required, into its _constant_ and _inconstant_ elements.

2. Make up the inconstant element by the different consonants and consonantal combinations until they are exhausted.

3. In the list of words so formed, mark off those which have an existence in the language; these will all rhyme with each other; and if the list of combinations be exhaustive, there are no other words which will do so.

_Example._--From the word _told_, separate the _o_ and _-ld_, which are constant.

Instead of the inconstant element _t_, write successively, _p_, _pl_, _pr_, _b_, _bl_, _br_, &c.: so that you have the following list:--_t-old_, _p-old_, _pl-old_, _pr-old_, _b-old_, _bl-old_, _br-old_, &c.

Of these _plold_, _blold_, and _brold_, have no existence in the language; the rest, however, are rhymes.

-- 677. All words have the same number of possible, but not the same number of actual rhymes. Thus, _silver_ is a word amenable to the same process as _told--pilver_, _plilver_, _prilver_, _bilver_, &c.; yet _silver_ is a word without a corresponding rhyme. This is because the combinations which answer to it do not const.i.tute words, or combinations of words in the English language.

This has been written, not for the sake of showing poets how to manufacture rhymes, but in order to prove that a result which apparently depends on the ingenuity of writers, is reducible to a very humble mechanical process, founded upon the nature of rhyme and the limits to the combinations of consonants.

{531}

PART VII.

THE DIALECTS OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE.

-- 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 a.n.a.lysis 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 ill.u.s.tration of this see pp. 4, 5.

-- 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 cla.s.sifying the dialects. These may be called the ethnological, and the structural methods.

According to the former, we place in the same cla.s.s 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 cla.s.s, we do so simply because they are alike; not because they are affiliated.

Such are the two chief principles of cla.s.sification. Generally, they coincide; in other words, similarity of external characters is _prima facie_ evidence of affinity in the way of affiliation, ident.i.ty of origin being the safest a.s.sumption in the way of cause; whilst ident.i.ty 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 _prima facie_ evidence. Dialects of the same origin may grow unlike; dialects of different origins alike.

-- 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.

-- 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 Yorks.h.i.+reman differs from a Hamps.h.i.+re 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 Yorks.h.i.+reman of 1850 A.D. differs from one of 1550 A.D. {533}

-- 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 circ.u.mstanced 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.

-- 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.

-- 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 cla.s.ses 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 doc.u.ments; in other words, certain points of philology, and certain points of bibliography.

-- 685. _Philological preliminaries._--These are points of p.r.o.nunciation, 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}

-- 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:--