184 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[No. 42. 



upon it as it stands he aetually agrees with me. I 

 said that the passajje "in our sense of the term" 

 is unintelliu;ible. 1 still say so ; and he who at- 

 tempts t/O mend it, or modernise the form, says so 

 too. Tiie question next arises, Does he not mean 

 no system, when he says system f Otherwise, why 

 does he say that Shakspeare uses tlie passive for 

 the active participle, when he explains the word 

 not by the active participle, but by an adjective of 

 totally different meaning ? Is it not more likely 

 that Mr. IIalliwell may have misunderstood 

 Shakspeare's system, tlian ihat the latter should 

 have used intelligible words, and precise forms 

 of words, so at raiulom ? And, moreover, does 

 not the critic confound two meanings of the word 

 delightful; the one obsolete, full of delight, the 

 other the common one, giving delight, or gratify- 



ing f 



Now, by a violent figure which Shakspeare 

 sometimes uses, delighted may mean delightful in 

 the former sense; perhaps, va^\qv, filled imth de- 

 light. The word then would be formed directly 

 from the noun, and must not be regarded as a par- 

 ticiple at all, but rather an ellipsis, from which the 

 verb (which may be represented by give, fill, en- 

 dow, &c.) is omitted. Take, as an instance, this 

 passage in Measure for Measure: — 



" Clan. Death is a fearful thing ! 

 " Isa. And shamed life a hateful." 



The meaning liere is not life asJuimed, but life 

 covered with shame. In this sense Mr. Halliwell, 

 apparently without knowing why, has adopted the 

 term delightful; but then the two succeeding 

 words of his explanation, " sweet, pleasant," he 

 would appear to have taken at random from a 

 dictionary, forgetting that he was not using the 

 word in its oriinary sense; for it is not possible 

 that he can suppose Shakspeare to have used the 

 ■word in the sense of the active participle. Now, 

 though I do not think this at all the expression 

 that Shakspeare wouhl use, it is undoubtedly 

 allowable as a general characteristic ; but the 

 word actually used would appear to imply the 

 result of a particular action, which would have 

 been productive of anytliing but delight. In 

 short, as we are agreed that the word delighted 

 in the passage in question in its present sense is 

 unintelligible, so also are we, I think, agreed 

 that the substitute, if any, must be used in a 

 passive sense. 



Now, with regard to the first instance furnished 

 by Mr. IlALUWELLof the use of the passive for the 

 active participle, if I were sure that the delinquent 

 were well out of hearing, and not likely " to rise 

 again and jiush us from our stools," I should be 

 disposed to repeat the charge of impertinence 

 against tlie editor who altered "professed" to 

 "l)ri)fessing." Tlie word profes,scd is one of com- 

 mon use, and in llie jiresent instance jwrfcctly 



intelligible. " To your bosom, professed to enter- 

 tain so much love and care for our father, I com- 

 mit liim," seems to express the sense of the passage : 

 a doubt is implied by the expression, but there is 

 a directness of insult in the term professing quite 

 inconsistent with the character of Cordelia. 



" Becomed love " is love suited or fitted to the 

 occasion. The use of the passive participle is 

 every way more appropriate than that of the active, 

 though the latter is more common now. 



In the next instance, I have to observe that 

 there is no such verb as to guile. Ginle is a noun ; 

 and "guiled shore" \s guile-covered, or charactered 

 shore. According to this rule, the modern word 

 talented, that is, talent- endorved, has been formed, 

 it not having been considered that licences are 

 allowed in poetry that are unsuited to ordinary 

 language. 



The passage next referred to is conditicmal, and 

 I regard the use of the passive participle here, too, 

 as correct. 



I have thus reduced Mr. IIalliwell's list to that 

 number which usually forms the exception rather 

 than the rule ; and if accident, misprint, error in 

 copying, or other special circumstance be not held 

 sufiicient to account for the single remaining 

 uistance, I have then only to say that I prefer 

 deformed to defmning, as an epithet applied dis- 

 paragingly to Time's hand as more in accordance 

 with Shakspeare's practice, who was not in the 

 habit of repeating the same idea, which, in the 

 latter case, would occur again in the word ''defea- 

 tures" in the following line. 



JNIr. IIalliwell may, doubtless, find other in- 

 stances, perhaps more i'elicitous tlian these ; at 

 present, all I can say is that he has failed to show 

 that the use of the passive for the active participle 

 was conunon with Shakspe.are. As to other vari- 

 ations between the grammatical usage of Shak- 

 speare's day and that of our own, I can assure him 

 that I am not quite so ignorant of the fact as he 

 imagines. Samuel Hickson. 



August 1. 1850, 



ENGLISH COMEDIANS IN GERMANV. 



I am glad to be enabled to reply to ]\Ir. Bolton 

 Corney's Query (Vol. i., p. 439.) respecting a 

 German book of plays. 



The learned illustrator of the Curiosities of 

 Literature woidd find the information he desires in 

 the Vorrath zur Geschichte der dvutscJien drama- 

 tischen Dithtkunst of the Ibimerly celebrated 

 J. Christoph Gottsched (Leij>zig, 1767-69, 2 vols. 

 8vo.). But as this book, now somewhat ne- 

 glected, would perhaps be difficult to be found 

 even in the British Museum, I will transcribe the 

 contents of the Srhau-Bilhne evglischer und fran- 

 zDsischer ComUdiantcn uiijf icelchvr icerden vorge- 

 stellt die schijnsten vnd neucstcn Comiidien, so vor 



