Part 29

The following instances may be noticed of gradation between the singular and the plural of the preterite: began, pl. begunne begonne, gan, pl. gonnen, ran, pl. runne, wan, pl. wonne, bond, pl. bounden, fond, pl. founden, song (sang), pl. songe sunge, sprong, pl. spronge sprungen, drank (dronk), pl. drunke, bar, pl. bere (beere), brak, pl. brieken, spak, pl. spieke, sat, pl. sete(n) siete(n) seete, bad, pl. bede, lay (lih), pl. lihe leie(n), wax, pl. woxen, wrot, pl. write(n), rod, pl. riden, ches, pl. chose, and among preterite-presents can, pl. conne, mai, pl. mowe, schal, pl. schulle schull schol, wot, pl. wite.

There are some few instances in F of strong preterites with irregular -e termination in the 1st or 3rd pers. singular, but in no case is this authenticated by metre or rhyme. The following are examples in which F and S are agreed, ‘schope a wile,’ v. 4278, ‘he bare him,’ v. 5236, ‘which sihe his Soster,’ v. 5810, ‘lete come,’ vi. 1186, ‘he tho toke hire in his arm,’ viii. 1732. These are perhaps mistakes, and they have sometimes been corrected in the text on the authority of other MSS.

The 2nd pers. sing. has the -e termination, as sihe (syhe), iii. 2629, iv. 599, were, iv. 600, knewe, vi. 2313, come, viii. 2076, but tok, i. 2421. The 2nd pers. sing. of the preterite-present mai is regularly miht (myht), never ‘mayest.’ Occasionally the best MSS. give it as mihte, e.g. i. 2457, vii. 2637, 3819, but there is no metrical confirmation of this form. The preterite plural is very rarely found without -e, as v. 3300, 7534, vii. 3574.

Among Weak Verbs those which have the short or syncopated form keep the -e termination almost regularly. Such preterites are, for example, aspide, cride, deide, leide, obeide, payde, preide, seide, teide, hadde, made, brende, sende, answerde, ferde, herde, solde, spilde, tolde, wende, betidde, dradde, fedde, fledde, hedde, gradde, ladde, radde, spedde, spradde, crepte, duelte, felte, hente, kepte, kiste, lefte, lepte, loste, mente, slepte, wente, wepte, alihte, caste, dihte, grette, knette, kutte, laste, liste, mette, plyhte, putte, schette, sette, sterte, triste, arawhte, broghte, cawhte, oghte, roghte, schryhte, soghte, strawhte, tawhte, thoghte, wroghte, cowthe, dorste, mihte, moste, scholde, wiste, wolde.

At the same time it must be noted (as in the case of the infinitive) that with some of these forms there is an occasional tendency to drop the -e before a vowel at the beginning of the next word (that is, where elision would take place), and the agreement of the best MSS., especially F and S, makes it certain this was sometimes done by the author. It is impossible to trace any system, but the number of verbs affected is not large, and in nearly every case the instances of this kind of elision-apocope are largely outnumbered by the examples of normal inflexion in the same verb.

The following is a tolerably full list of references for these preterite forms, which are given in alphabetical order: ‘Beraft hire,’ v. 5647, ‘it betidd upon the cas,’ vii. 4381, ‘Sche cast on me,’ i. 152, ‘cast up hire lok,’ v. 5436, ‘he cast his lok,’ vi. 1035, ‘dorst he,’ ii. 1633, ‘drad him,’ viii. 1368, ‘And felt it’ (subj.), viii. 2165, ‘so ferd I,’ viii. 2445, ‘had herd hem,’ v. 5865, ‘Hir bodi hent up,’ v. 5702, ‘herd he noght sein,’ iii. 2082, ‘And kept hire,’ ii. 181, ‘Sche kept al doun,’ v. 1495, ‘he kest him,’ vi. 1746, ‘And kist him,’ v. 3777, 5592, ‘and knet it,’ v. 6866, ‘he kut it,’ vii. 4525, ‘what him list he tok,’ iii. 2446, ‘Sche lost al,’ ii. 2290, cp. v. 3465, ‘That mad hem,’ ii. 310, and so also v. 986, 3393, 3822, ‘ne myht I,’ i. 1280, ‘miht eschuie,’ iii. 1356, and so also iii. 1440, vii. 4285, ‘Put under,’ Prol. 683, ‘Wan and put under,’ Prol. 718, ‘He put hem into,’ i. 1013, ‘Sche put hire hand,’ i. 1807, and so also ii. 3267, v. 3045, 4088, 5326, 6409, vi. 2062, vii. 4402, viii. 2702, ‘thei putt hem,’ v. 7417, ‘Of ous, that schold ous,’ Prol. 543 (so SF), ‘schold every wys man,’ ii. 578, ‘And seid hir,’ i. 3188, ‘Seid ek,’ v. 4309, ‘And set hire,’ ii. 2220, ‘He set him,’ v. 3691, ‘he set an essamplaire,’ vii. 4262, ‘And tawht hem so’ (‘tawhte’ S), iii. 176, ‘told him,’ i. 3187, ii. 803, 2865 (‘tolde’ S), vii. 4688, told hem,’ v. 3883, viii. 1555, ‘he told out,’ ii. 884, ‘every man went on his syde,’ v. 7403, ‘And went hem out’ (pl.), v. 7533, ‘sche wist it,’ ii. 2010, ‘thanne wold I,’ i. 183, ‘and wold have,’ v. 4217, ‘I wold stele,’ v. 7137, ‘wold I,’ viii. 2298, to which we may add ‘myht obeie,’ and ‘behight him’ from the Praise of Peace, 39, 41.

Of these examples it is to be remembered, first that in only one case, ‘I wold stele,’ v. 7137, does this apocope take place before a consonant, though in one other instance, v. 5865, the following word begins with an aspirated h; and secondly, that with all these, except perhaps put, the full form of the preterite is that which usually occurs before a vowel as well as elsewhere. Even in the case of put we have the form putte frequently when it is subject to elision, as Prol. 1069, ‘And putte awey malencolie,’ and so ii. 713, 2684, iv. 399, 1368, &c., as well as regularly before a consonant, as ‘With strengthe he putte kinges under,’ i. 2797. The form putt occurs in v. 7417, and in this case the verb is plural. The only other instances of plurals in the list are Prol. 543 and v. 7533.

With regard to the weak verbs which form preterites with ending -ede, the loss of the final e is somewhat more common, but it is usually retained, and sometimes it counts as a syllable in the verse. Where this is not the case, it is either elided in the usual way, or if it be dropped in writing, this is only under the conditions which apply to the verbs mentioned above, namely, before a vowel at the beginning of the succeeding word.

It is, however, noteworthy that the use of these forms, whether in -ede or -ed, is decidedly rare, and was avoided by our author even in cases where the -e would have been subject to elision. It is evident that he was always conscious of this ending, even if he did not always write it, and yet he felt that the two weak syllables ought not to have full value in the metre. The result was that he avoided the use of the form generally, so far as it was reasonably possible to do so. The whole number of these preterites in -ede, -ed to be found in the Confessio Amantis is surprisingly small, both actually and relatively, that is, taking account of the extent to which the verbs in question are employed in their other tenses. The method pursued is chiefly to substitute in narrative the present tense, or the perfect formed with ‘hath,’ for the 3rd person singular of the preterite, ‘Conforteth’ for ‘Confortede,’ ‘Hath axed’ for ‘axede,’ ‘feigneth’ for ‘feignede,’ and this apparently as a matter of habit and even in cases where a vowel follows. No doubt the use of the present tense in narrative is quite usual apart from this, but the extremely frequent combination of strong or syncopated preterites with the present tenses of verbs of this class seems to me to indicate clearly how the matter stood.

The following are a few of the examples of this: ‘For sche tok thanne chiere on honde And clepeth him,’ i. 1767 f., ‘The king comandeth ben in pes, And ... caste,’ 3240 f., ‘Comendeth, and seide overmore,’ 3361, ‘he him bethoghte,... And torneth to the banke ayein,’ ii. 167 ff., ‘for hem sente And axeth hem,’ 613 f., ‘lay ... clepeth oute ... sterte,’ 848 ff., ‘Sche loketh and hire yhen caste,’ 1066, ‘This child he loveth kindely ... Bot wel he sih ... axeth ... seide,’ 1381 ff., ‘Sche preide him and conseileth bothe,’ 1457, ‘Which semeth outward profitable And was,’ 2201 f., ‘And he himself that ilke throwe Abod, and hoveth there stille,’ iii. 1232 f., and so on.

These examples will serve to illustrate a tendency which every reader will observe, when once his attention has been called to it. There are indeed many narrative passages in which nearly all the strong or syncopated verbs are used in the preterite, and all the others in the present, and it is evident that this cannot be accidental.

There are, however, a certain number of instances of the use of weak preterites, indicative or subjunctive, and a few in which the final e (or -en) is sounded in the metre.

The following are examples of -ede preterites (in one instance -ide): ‘I wisshide after deth,’ i. 120, ‘he passede ate laste,’ 142, ‘he hem stoppede alle faste,’ 522, ‘And warnede alle his officiers,’ 2506, ‘Mi ladi lovede, and I it wiste,’ ii. 502, ‘he axede hem anon,’ 1248, ‘he rounede in thin Ere,’ 1944, ‘Bot he hire lovede, er he wente,’ 2027, ‘Thogh that he lovede ten or tuelve,’ 2063, ‘Supplantede the worthi knyht,’ 2453, ‘Sche pourede oute,’ iii. 679, so also iii. 1631, 2556, iv. 468, 825, 842, 934, 1340, 1345, 1444, ‘Lo, thus sche deiede a wofull Maide,’ iv. 1593, ‘it likede ek to wende,’ 2150, ‘Controeveden be sondri wise,’ 2454, ‘Translateden. And otherwise,’ 2660, ‘And foundeden the grete Rome,’ v. 904, ‘He feignede him,’ 928, ‘And clepede him,’ 951, ‘He percede the harde roche,’ 1678, ‘Thei faileden, whan Crist was bore,’ 1697, ‘Thei passeden the toun,’ 2182, ‘Alle othre passede of his hond,’ 3258, ‘Welcomede him,’ 3373, ‘walkede up and doun’ (pl.), 3833, ‘axede him,’ 5129, so also 5774, 6132, 6791, 6887, ‘oppressede al the nacion’ (pl.), vi. 568, ‘That loveden longe er I was bore,’ 882, ‘he usede ay,’ 1207, ‘exilede out of londe,’ 2348, ‘Enformeden,’ vii. 1495, ‘Devoureden,’ 3346, ‘Ensamplede hem’ (pl.), 4441, ‘Restorede hem,’ 4445, so also 4632, 4986, 4992, 4998, &c., ‘Eschuieden to make assay,’ viii. 373, ‘With love wrastlede and was overcome,’ 2240.

This list of examples, which is fairly complete up to v. 1970, will sufficiently show the manner in which -ede preterites are used. In more than three-fourths of the instances quoted the -e is subject to elision, and of those that remain nine are examples of the plural with -eden termination, and three only of the ending -ede, viz. ii. 2063, ‘Thogh that he lovede ten or tuelve,’ ii. 2453, ‘Supplantede the worthi knyht,’ and v. 1678, ‘He percede the harde roche,’ of which the first is really a case of syncope, ‘lov’de,’ as also ii. 502 (cp. vi. 882) and iv. 1593, whereas in ii. 2027 ‘lovede’ occurs unsyncopated but with -e elided. It will be noted that in the plural the form -eden is used regularly when the syllables are to be fully pronounced, though -ede can be used for the sake of elision.

The -ed form of preterite is less frequent than the other, and I am not aware of any clear example of its employment before a consonant or in rhyme. We have, for example, ‘And used it,’ i. 342, ‘Sche cleped him,’ i. 1535 (‘humbled him,’ i. 2065, is probably a participle, ‘to have humbled himself’), ‘pryded I me,’ i. 2372, ‘ne feigned I,’ ii. 2061, ‘the goddes ... Comanded him,’ iii. 2140 f., ‘Thei cleped him,’ v. 876, cp. 1057, &c. In iii. 1759, ‘The Gregois torned fro the siege,’ we have most probably a participle, ‘were torned.’ We may observe that the -ed form stands also in the plural.

Among weak preterites from originally strong verbs we may notice abreide, crepte (but past participle crope), foghte, fledde, schotte, slepte (also slep, with past participle slepe), smette (beside smot), wepte. The pret. satte in vii. 2282, ‘He satte him thanne doun,’ seems to arise from confusion of sat and sette.

=Imperative.= The Confessio Amantis is peculiarly rich in imperatives. Beside the regular imperative singular forms, e.g. ared, besech, behold, ches, com, do, forsak, griet, help, hier, hyd, kep, lef, ly, lei, lest, lep, prei, put, say, schrif, spek, tak, tell, thenk, understond, ȝif, &c., the MSS. give us also hyde, iii. 1502, seie, vii. 4084, speke, vii. 5422, take, iv. 2674, v. 6429, thenke, iii. 1083, but not in such positions as to affect the metre. The forms axe, herkne, loke, wite are regular, but lok also occurs (i. 1703, v. 1220).

In some instances the short form of imperative seems to be used as 3rd pers., e.g. ‘hold clos the ston,’ v. 3573, for ‘let him hold,’ ‘tak in his minde,’ viii. 1128, for ‘let him take,’ cp. viii. 1420. The singular and plural forms are often used without distinction, as v. 2333 ff., ‘Ches ... and witeth ... ches and tak ... goth ... taketh,’ v. 3986, ‘So help me nou, I you beseche,’ with ‘Helpeth,’ just above, several persons being addressed, and so ‘taketh hiede And kep conseil,’ viii. 1509 f., to one person. In the interchange of speech between the Confessor and the Lover, while sometimes the distinction is preserved, the Confessor saying tak, tell, understond, and the Lover telleth, axeth (e.g. i. 1395, 1875), at other times the Lover says lest, say, tell, lef, &c. (i. 1942, 1972, ii. 2074, iii. 841, &c.).

=Present Participle.= The form of the present participle is the most characteristic part of Gower’s verb inflexion as compared (for example) with Chaucer’s. Chaucer seems regularly to have used the form in -inge (often with apocope -ing): Gower uses ordinarily the form -ende, and normally with the accent thrown on the termination, as i. 204, ‘To me spekende thus began,’ 236, ‘Whos Prest I am touchende of love,’ 428, ‘Stondende as Stones hiere and there,’ 633, ‘So that semende of liht thei werke,’ 1379 f., ‘That for I se no sped comende,... compleignende,’ 1682, ‘Hangende doun unto the chin.’

Sometimes the same form is used with accent on the preceding syllable, and in this case the -e is systematically elided, e.g. Prol. 11, ‘In tyme comende after this,’ 259, ‘Belongende unto the presthode,’ i. 296, ‘As touchende of my wittes fyve’ (cp. 334, 742), 3025, ‘And wailende in his bestly stevene.’

In a relatively small number of instances the form -inge occurs either in rhyme, as i. 524, ‘So whan thei comen forth seilinge,’ in rhyme with ‘singe,’ i. 1710, ‘And liveth, as who seith, deyinge,’ in rhyme with ‘likynge’ (subst.), or with the accent thrown back, as i. 115, ‘Wisshinge and wepinge al myn one,’ v. 518, ‘Abidinge in hir compaignie,’ vi. 717, ‘I mai go fastinge everemo’; rarely out of rhyme and with accent, as i. 2721, ‘Mi fader, as touchinge of al.’

The final e is never lost in writing, but when the accent is thrown back it is always elided.

=Past Participle.= The -id termination of weak past participles is very rarely found in the Fairfax MS., except in the concluding passage, which is copied in a different hand from the rest. It occurs commonly in the Praise of Peace. Examples found elsewhere in F are weddid, iv. 650, medlid, iv. 1475.

From setten besides the regular past participle set there appears the form sete twice in rhyme, vii. 2864, forȝete : sete, and viii. 244, misgete (past partic.): upsete. This seems to be formed after the analogy of gete. On the other hand we have ferd, i. 445, &c., but also fare(n), iii. 2692, v. 3797, &c. The past participle of se is sen, sein, seie, but most commonly sene. In a few instances a final e is given by the MSS. in weak past participles, e.g. herde for herd, v. 4231, schope for schop, v. 4278, sette for set, vi. 10, wiste for wist, viii. 37.

The cases of weak past participles with plural inflexion (e.g. Prol. 300, i. 3246, iv. 2343, v. 6789) have already been mentioned in dealing with adjectives.

There is hardly any use of the prefix y- (i-), but we have ybore, ii. 499.

vi. DIALECT. Gower’s language is undoubtedly in the main the English of the Court, and not a provincial dialect. Making allowance for the influences of literary culture and for a rather marked conservatism in orthography and grammatical inflexions, we can see that it agrees on the whole with the London speech of the time, as evidenced by the contemporary documents referred to by Prof. Morsbach. At the same time its tendencies are Southern rather than Midland, and he seems to have used Kentish forms rather more freely than Chaucer. This is shown especially (1) in the more extensive use of the forms in which e stands for O. E. y̆, as senne, kesse, pet, hell, &c.; (2) in the frequent employment of ie, both in French and English words, to represent ẹ̄, a practice which can hardly be without connexion with the Kentish cliene, diepe, diere, hier, hield, niede, &c.; (3) in the use of -ende as the normal termination of the present participle. (The Ayenbite regularly has -inde.) Probably also the preference shown by Gower for the close sound of ē, from O. E. ǣ, may be to some extent due to Kentish influence. Other points of resemblance between the language of Gower and that of the Ayenbite (for example) are the free use of syncopated forms in the 3rd pers. sing. of verbs and the regular employment of ous for us.

vii. METRE, &c. The smoothness and regularity of Gower’s metre has been to some extent recognized. Dr. Schipper in Englische Metrik, vol. i. p. 279, remarks upon the skill with which the writer, while preserving the syllabic rule, makes his verse flow always so smoothly without doing violence to the natural accentuation of the words, and giving throughout the effect of an accent verse, not one which is formed by counting syllables. Judging by the extracts printed in Morris and Skeat’s Specimens (which are taken from MS. Harl. 3869, and therefore give practically the text of Fairfax 3), he observes that the five principal licences which he has noted generally in the English verse of the period are almost entirely absent from Gower’s octosyllabics, and in particular that he neither omits the first unaccented syllable, as Chaucer so often does (e.g. ‘Be it rouned, red or songe,’ Hous of Fame, ii. 214, ‘Any lettres for to rede,’ iii. 51, ‘Of this hill that northward lay,’ iii. 62), nor displaces the natural accent (as ‘Of Decembre the tenthe day,’ Hous of Fame, i. 111, ‘Jupiter considereth wel this,’ ii. 134, ‘Rounede everych in otheres ere,’ iii. 954), nor slurs over syllables.