teche (: beseche, i. 590, 2260, iii. 132).
The above are the results arrived at by examination of the rhymes with vowels of undoubted quality; i.e. ę̄ from O. E. ēa, and ẹ̄ from O. E. ē, ēo, īe. In addition to this, an investigation has been made of the rhyming of these words among themselves and with words of Romance origin, in the process of which some additional words with ē from ǣ, as dele, hele, swete, ‘sweat,’ wete, are brought in. This cannot here be given in full, but it may be said that in almost all points it confirms the results arrived at above. A few words, however, to which an open vowel is assigned above, rhyme with other words from ǣ which almost certainly have ẹ̄, and therefore must be set as having unstable pronunciation. Thus, in spite of the rhyme lene (lend) : bene mentioned above, we have lene : mene (both verb and subst.) and lene : clene, and though fere rhymes more than once with ere, we have lered : afered and unlered : afered, which suggest that the close sound was possible.
On the whole we may set down the following as the result of our examination.
With open vowel: of the ǣ (ē) class, bede, pret. pl., breth, her (pl. heres), lete, lewed, strete: of the ā = ai class, er, geth, leve (remain), ȝee (yea).
With close vowel: of the former class, leche, meete (dream), mete (fit), slepe, speche, speke, pret. pl., thred, wete, wreche, ȝer, and with one exception only in each case dede, slep: of the latter class, areche, clene, del, evere, lere, mene, nevere, teche, and with one exception in each case, -hede (-hiede), lede, sprede.
With unstable vowel: from ǣ (ē), drede, eve, fere (fear), red (subst.), rede, there, were, where: from ǣ = ai, hete, lene, see (sea).
The conclusions to which we are led are, first that in Gower’s usage there is less instability of vowel-sound in these words than in Chaucer, the number of words with unstable vowel being smaller and the variations even in their case more exceptional; secondly that Gower’s language has a strongly pronounced leaning towards ẹ̄; and finally that this tendency is quite as much visible in the words of the ǣ = ai class as in the others.
O. E. =ēa=. The substantive believe has ẹ̄ by influence of the verb.
There is no use apparently of nę̄de from nēad or of ȝę̄r from gēar, and ek, eke, seems invariably to have ẹ̄.
From ēage, flēah, hēah, nēah we have yhe, flyh, hih, nyh.
There seems no reason to suppose that stre, sle had ẹ̄, as has been concluded for Chaucer’s language because of such rhymes as sle : he, stre : she, stree : we, see ten Brink, Chaucers Sprache, §23.
It has already been shown that see (sea), which we have supposed to have unstable vowel quality, very seldom rhymes with words having ẹ̄, notwithstanding the frequent opportunity for such rhymes, and ȝee, ‘yea,’ never. It may be questioned whether the rule laid down by ten Brink for Chaucer is a sound one, and whether Chaucer’s practice does not really depend simply upon the larger supply of rhymes in ẹ̄, such as he, she, me, thee, be, se (verb), tre, three, &c. It is at least possible that the difference here between Gower and Chaucer arises from the fact that the latter was less strict in his rhymes, and certainly the later developments of sle, see, stre, ȝee supply no confirmation of the idea that they had ẹ̄ regularly in Chaucer’s language.
O. E. =ēo=. By the side of sek (siek) there is occasionally sik.
The form fil, fille for fell, felle, pret. sing. and pl. from falle, are not used by Gower. He rhymes fell (fēoll) : hell (hyll) and felle, pret. pl.: felle (fyllan).
The personal pronoun ȝow (ȝou) from ēow rhymes with thou, now, &c.
O. E. =ī=. Fahrenberg’s instances of ī : ē, i. 177 f. and iii. 413 f., are both founded on mistakes.
O. E. =ū=. The personal pronoun from O. E. ūs is always written ous, but rhymes in some instances with -us in Latin names, e.g. Tricolonius : ous, Tereüs : ous.
būtan is shortened to bot, not but. It occurs also as a dissyllable in the form bote.
O. E. =ȳ=. The only example of ȳ as ē is fer from fȳr, which occurs in rhyme with ȝer, iii. 694, (elsewhere fyr). Chaucer has fere, dat., rhyming with here, adv., Troilus, iii. 978, and also afere in rhyme with stere, ‘stir,’ Troilus, i. 229.
The cases of hedde, hed, pret. and past participle (from hȳdan), are examples of shortened ȳ passing naturally to e, and so also fest from fȳst, felthe from fȳlþe, threste from þrȳsta.
From ȳg in drȳge we have dreie, but also drye.
O. E. =ō=. Gower, like Chaucer, rhymes the word do (misdo, undo, &c.), and occasionally to in therto, with words that have ǭ derived from ā, not only so, also, two, wo, but also tho, adv. (i. 2609, iii. 683, v. 5331, &c.), go, ago (ii. 2483, 3513, iv. 1161, 3465, v. 5173, &c.), overmo (i. 2385), no (v. 4776), fo (iv. 3407). These words also rhyme with proper names, such as Juno, Lichao, Babio. The other forms of do, as doth, don, rhyme nearly always with ọ̄, but once we have doth : goth, v. 3967 f., and once don : anon, v. 3627 f. The rhyme soth : goth also occurs, v. 1579 f. This latter class of rhyme, as don : anon, don : gon, sothe : bothe, soth : wroth, occurs frequently in Chaucer’s earlier work, as the Book of the Duchess, but much less so in the later.
These rhymes, like those of hom with com, &c., noticed above under ā, are to be explained as due to scarcity of exactly corresponding rhyme words. The only exact rhyme for do and to is in fact schoo, which is found in Prol. 356, but obviously could not be of frequent occurrence. The explanation given by ten Brink, Chaucers Sprache, § 31, and repeated mechanically by others, is that certain words which have ǭ from ā, as wo, two, so (swā), may equally have ọ̄ upon occasion owing to the influence of w. This is shown to be wrong both by the fact that the rhymes in question are, as we have seen, by no means confined to these words, and by the absence of other evidence in the case of wo and so that they ever had a tendency to ọ̄. The fact that the rhyme do : so is by far the commonest instance is due simply to the more frequent occasion for using the words.
In the rhyme glove : love, v. 7047 f., we have to deal with ọ̄, and there can be no question here of love from lufian. Both sense and rhyme point to a verb love corresponding to the substantive lof or love, mod. luff, and signifying the action of bringing a ship’s head up nearer to the wind. The other rhymes used with glove are behove, Prol. 357, prove, iii. 2153.
We may note that wowe from wōgian rhymes with bowe (būgan), which does not fit in with ten Brink’s very questionable theory about the development of ou (ow), Chaucers Sprache, § 46, Anm.
(3) ROMANCE VOWELS. A few notes only will be added here to what has already been said in the Introduction to Gower’s French Works.
Words with -oun (-on) ending, as condicioun (-on), opinioun (-on), &c., rhyme only among themselves or with toun, doun, &c. There are no rhymes like Chaucer’s proporcion : upon, and it is to be noted especially that the rhyming of proper names in -on, as Salamon, Acteon, &c., with this class of words, which is very common in Chaucer, does not occur in Gower’s English, though we occasionally find it in his French. At the same time the possibility of such rhymes cannot be denied, for we have toun : Ylioun, v. 7235 f., and Lamedon : Jasoun, v. 7197 f.
Adjectives in -ous do not rhyme with -us, as in Chaucer Aurelius : amorous, Theseüs : desirous.
The Complete Works of John Gower, Volume 2 · The Wunder Library — complete classics, free to read, with narration.