270 



DISCOVEHY 



17//1 Cruliirv 



-tir : Wrncy Memoirs : ventarous, jointer, venler, 

 futir, Inter ' future.' Cooper (1685) says that 

 picture is pronounced like pick't her. 

 -tine : \Vrneys have fortin ' fortune,' (onrtin, for- 



tine, misfortin, tinjortinate. ' 



-u- : Wriu vs : miraciloHs, continial. 

 -u : valy vb. ' value' (Lady Sussex), neiiie (Mrs. 

 Basire). 

 x8th Century 



-une : fortin (said by Tony Lumpkin in She 



Stoops to Conquer), 

 -ure : Wentworth Papers : creators, tarter ' torture,' 

 etc. Jones (1701) says -ure is ' sounded like 

 -cr ' in adventure, cincture, etc. 

 -u- : Lady Wentworth has vertious, vallyed ' valued,' 

 yousyal ' usual.' 

 What would be thought of one who nowadays should 

 speak of ' leavin a fortin to his nevy ' ? And yet 

 that was the manner of speech of scholars as well as 

 of great ladies in the politest periods of our history. 



Tlie ending -on 



The habit of pronouncing unaccented -on as -in 

 (written -in, -yn, or -en) is traceable during the 15th, 

 and the -en, -in spellings become increasingly common 

 in the following centuries. Some words such as 

 pidgeon are still commonly pronounced with -in, and 

 old people alive till quite recently, pronounced surgeon, 

 luncheon, cushion in this way. 



Sesyn ' season,' Devynshyre, reken ' reckon,' etc., are 

 found in the 15th century, and reasyn ' reason,' burgine 

 ' to bud,' mutten, Marten College (Merton), conmyshin 

 ' commission,' dungen, to reckin, prysyn ' prison,' 

 Posshene ' portion ' in the i6th. The Verney Memoirs 

 have surgin 'surgeon,' nfcjns 'ribbons,' fashing ' fashion.' 

 In the i8th century Jones indicates what is certainly 

 the same pronunciation, which he calls ' the sound of 

 e,' in contagion, cushion, fashion, luncheon, truncheon. 

 Peter Wentworth writes beckinged, Lady Wentworth 

 Compten ; Baker (1724) writes sturgin, dungin ' dun- 

 geon,' punchin ' puncheon,' flaggin ' flagon,' cooshin. 



-ac- in unaccented syllables 

 15//1 Century 



stomechere, almyneke. 

 17//1 Century 



Verney Memoirs : stomichers, obsticle, carictor. 

 i8tk Ccnturv 



Baker (1724) : stomick, Isic. 



-a- iM unaccented syllables before various consonants 

 15th Century 



-ave : Seynt Oleffes (Olave). 



-age- (-enge-) : messynger, etc. (ver>' frequent). 



16//1 Century 



-ase : purchisse (Gabriel Harvey). 



-an- : compeny. 

 lylh Century 



-an-: compiny (Lady Sussex). 



-as- : Sir Tomis Chike (Lady Sussex). 



-a- : contrydicting. 

 i8th Century 



-ave : St. Olive (Jones, 1701). 



-ate: pryvit (Lady Wentworth); chockolet (Lady 

 Strafford). 



-0-, -OVV-, in unaccented syllables 

 l^th Century 



dysabey ; abedyensses ; sa tnych ' so much ' ; 

 bysshape. 

 16th Century 



men a warre ' men-of-war ' (Lord Berners) ; Justus 

 a pesse : seaven a clocke ; ten a clocke ; 

 apinions. 

 ijth Century 



soriful (Lady Sussex) ; acomidasyon (ibid.) ; abay 

 (Mrs. Basire) ; fagels 'faggots ' (Lady Hobart); 

 Pigit ' Piggott ' (Lady Gardiner). 



The examples are enough to show that in earlier 

 times good speakers altered the vowel sounds in 

 unaccented sj'llables pretty much as w^e do to-day, 

 and that in some cases they went a good deal further 

 than we do. 



We see that the older pronunciation is that which 

 makes a difference in unaccented syllables, and not 

 that which attempts to produce a full vowel sound as 

 it would occur in an accented syllable. 



At the present time, the gospel of unchanged vowels 

 in unaccented syllables is preached in some quarters. 

 It is certainly a matter of taste whether Enghsh has 

 a nobler and more beautiful sound when pronounced 

 in a manner which is different from traditional habit 

 and natural tendency. No one can complain if some 

 people hold that it is so. But those who deliberately 

 introduce this form of artificiality into their speech 

 should frankly declare that they do this because they 

 like it, and should not attempt to justify the practice 

 by pretending that they are ' restoring ' the primitive 

 character of the language. It must be admitted that 

 such so-called ' restorations ' are, to use Dr. Johnson's 

 phrase, ' capricious innovations,' which would have 

 appeared as ludicrous in the successive ages of 

 Caxton, Shakespeare, Dryden, and Pope as, to many, 

 they appear to-day; indeed, they would have been 

 even less tolerable then, because less familiar; the 

 movement for ' reform ' had not begun, so far as our 

 evidence goes. If it existed at all, it must have ap- 



