Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1871-10-07

The London PoH Mall BUDGET, in noticing a
recent work on early English pronunciation, BY
Of the changes that have taken place within the
last two or three centuries. Z" Living" says the
BHdo.t, ''in the midst of changes. we rarely take
conscious note of them. To 30 great a degree is
this the case with the sounds of Language that
Hr. Eilis declares that there are few persons
lhimself being no exception who know pre-
slsely what their own pronunciation Is. We
fancy, however, that we do, and assume, with
out thinking OF the matter, that our forefsthers
OF hundred years ago pronounced Euglish
very much as we do now. We are surprised then
to learn that man of that period would have
talked of his entertainment at a 0ooIdsmitk's
at Room, where he sat in cheer, and was
oJteS9ed LOT eHrtesy's sake to eat some cor
camteT which was offered him in a greet bout
(ou in out;) or that Milton a hundred years
earlier would have spoken OF the coasan of
mans reHferiRg to dip his herd in biliag water:
or Shakespeare century before him would have
quoted from himself "OrR tooca of natter and
"a haste that wants discoorSc of rdvson" or
spoken OF his own plays (dy-mOdern eyeN of
:Hidsoommer NeekAfs cultural khl Drain" and
suffice TO Indicate some of the notable changes
in English pronunciation within period of two
or three hundred years. They are, however,
much greater than any which existed between
the thirteenth and sixteenth century: inasmach
as the vowel sounds of the earlier period were
the same as those of the continent generally
whereas in Shakspeare's time the divarication
! which now characteriZes Us had fair set in for
! d-oh and i-ee were on the way to get the
modern sounds of these letters"
Mr.. Ellis, the Budget thinks, "Has proved that
the long a of the fourteenth century was our a
in father, and long our a in Mary, the long 4
our i'm me, the long o the o in home, but we
doubt whether he has satisfactorily proved the
! long to have been the of the French futs
Again, we believe with him that the ca was then
the al in sail, oH the 90 in moon, but question
whether the al in fair was the az IN ave. We
have, however, no space for criticism. The con-
illusions above, which consider satisfactory, to
say nothing of Others, obviously indicate a re-
markable difference between the long-vowel
sounds of the fourteenth and nineteenth centu-
res They lead us, for instance, to pronounce age
doge reed as rdyd time rs TEEN, please plays,
mouth as mootk, fool as foIe boil as booiI. In
Shakspeare's time these sounds, according to
MIR. Ellis, for the most part persisted; but age,
reed, fool were beginning to have the present
sounds: time had the Scottish sound of tenn on its
way to the present full diphthongal sound; mouth
was mouth (Ov in ioto)as well as mouth, and per-
haps mouth las now.) Hence Hamlet's words in
certain passages would come out something like
this:
A haste that wants diScoorse of rayson
Would hare moon d longer!
Be they as pure French al as grass grace
A broken roofoe, and his whole JOORotiOa SHOOTING
- (suiting)
With forms to his conSaw.
Or to take arms against say of trOobleS.
MIR. Ellis's discussion OF the puns in Shak-
speare in their connection with the pronuncia-
ton Of the time Is acute and amusing. He
shows, for instance, that reason must have been
rdySon-ruisin in were reasons As plenty &c;
perez one-person, proving that one was then
0icT, not run, as at present.