Page images
PDF
EPUB

FORMATION OF THE

ENGLISH LANGUAGE.

The feeble advances which Saxon learning had made, was checked by the invasion of the Danes, and the mind was replunged again into the barbarity and ignorance from which, for two centuries, it had been slowly, at intervals, emerging. The brightest lights were already extinguished; the knowledge, for the most part, of the Saxons was buried in the graves of Aldhelm, Bede and Alcuin: and Alfred refreshed the lamps of learning only to shed a temporary gleam of light upon that benighted age and which was succeeded by still deeper darkness. The Norman conquest annihilated every thing but the Saxon mind and it remains now to consider the changes which took place in the language.

That an entire change was wrought in the Saxon language, and that the result of this change is the English of the present day, though enriched from other sources, and vastly improved, while at the same time the Saxon element actually predominates, no one doubts, who has traced it through its transition and

carefully studied its nature.

But the causes of this

transformation are not so evident.

In order to maintain that the same effects would have ensued if William and his followers had remained in their native soil, it is necessary to assign other causes, and to show by what particular inherent law of the language, or what general law in the organization of those who spoke it, this transformation has been, and under any circumstances, would have been effected.

Language is not independent of external circumstances or foreign influences; and though it may be true that in our own times political commotions have not affected languages; that they have not confused them, or disarranged their idioms, it by no means follows that in a different state of society, like that of our early ancesters, when only a small part of the living language was committed to writing, such effects and derangements would not follow such commotions: and although they may in no case affect the intellectual powers of man to the same degree that they influence civil society; yet no civil revolution has been recorded in history which did not leave its indelible impress upon the language of the people whose state was changed. And if we find that the language has not entirely given way and crumbled beneath the shock, it was not from the want of influences brought to bear upon it; it survived because of its own innate strength and plastic power; for like the sensible yet indestructible flower, though language

may be trodden down and mutilated, it can never be destroyed.

This property of language, on the other hand, renders it one of the strongest bonds that can hold together, and harmonize the discordant elements of society: it is the foundation and cement of government. Before a complete revolution can be effected in church or state, so as to entirely separate the present from the past, the language must be annihilated or so changed as to efface all those associations that have endeared to us, and attached us to the past: nay, the very connection in our thoughts must be severed before such a revolution is possible. Perhaps it is owing to the controlling influence of language over our mental operations, more than to any other cause, that the intellectual nature of man is not more deranged by violent political commotions and great civil revolutions: such revolutions though violent are, as we have said, never complete, and never affect men completely, because language keeps up a connection that nothing can break.

We may conclude therefore, that though language is never wholly altered by civil changes, and in our day is but little affected by them, it is not improbable that at an earlier period it was essentially modified by such changes.

The time extending from the eleventh to the fourteenth century may be termed the period of formation: during which the speech of England passed through various changes until it assumed nearly its present form, and is properly termed the English language.

This long period is covered with darkness, mellowed with but a few faint gleams of light, and yet it is not destitute of events pregnant with consequences to literature and learning.

The attention bestowed upon letters, in the auspicious era of Alfred entirely ceased at his death, and the mind continued to relapse in ignorance till the tenth century, when it seemed to have sunk to the lowest point of depression, and gave to the age the denomination, of the most benighted of the obscure ages. A universal torpor rested upon the human mind. There was no one to reprove the degeneracy of these times, and to awaken emulation, like the great Saxon king who told his countrymen; "There was a time when foreigners sought wisdom and learning in this island; but now we are compelled to seek them in foreign lands." Or like Alcuin, at once a poet, an orator, a linguist, an historian, a philosopher and theologian, who said to his contemporaries: "Think on the worth of our predecessors, and blush at your own inferiority! View the treasures of your library, and the magnificence of your monastery, and recall to mind the rigid virtues of those by whom they were formerly possessed. Among you was educated Bede, the most illustrious doctor of modern times. How intense was his application! How great in return is his reputation among men: How much greater still is his reward with God! Let his example rouse you from your torpor: listen to the instructions of your teachers, open your books, and learn to understand

their meaning." Hence the necessity of some sudden revolution to arouse the dormant energies of men.

The improvements, in art and letters, which the Normans brought with them, gave no immediate impulse to the Saxon mind; they rather diverted learning to another channel: the French becoming the popular language, caused the Saxon to be neglected and it was finally brought into contempt.

This neglect together with the events that followed confused the language itself, and reduced it to a chaotic state at this point, commence the process, the changes, which terminate in the English of the fourteenth century. The Saxon becomes in a manner a dead language; and the English is its resurrection in a purified form.

Language, like every art, and science, when analyzed and reduced to its fundamental elements, is exceedingly simple; * a few fundamental principles

*The noun and the verb are not only the principal parts of speech, but all others are derived from these. The Saxon verb is derived from the noun. The power of the verb is often given to the noun by implication or construction, and not expressed by any change of form. This is the case too with some verbs in the English. The words love, hope, fear, &c. These words whether used as nouns or verbs are the same. When they have different forms; the verb is formed by adding a final syllable to the noun, and the power of the verb is generally expressed by that syllable: as bat, a club, beat-an to beat.

46

66

bidde, a praver, bidd an to pray.

blostm, a flower, blostm-ian, to blossom,
cos. a kiss, cyss an, to kiss.

Thus the verbs are generally composed of a noun, and the syllables, an, ian, or gan but gan is generally abbreviated to an. These final syllables seem to imbue the noun with life and action. The idea of a verb without its primary noun is perhaps impossible. It is true the noun cannot always be found, but it may still exist in another language, it may have been dropped entirely after the verb was formed.

Verbs are formed from other verbs, as for-letan, to dismiss, being composed of faran, to go, and letan, to let, as is simply let go. Nouns are formed from two other nouns, as ac. an oak, and corn.

Primalive nouns express only sensible objects: but by combination and association they express abstract ideas.

« PreviousContinue »