II. — Oil Cei^tain Facts and Principles in the 

 Development of Form in Literature. 



By L. a. SHERMAN. 



Some ten years or more ago, on first attempting to teach 

 English Literature historically, I found my attention pecul- 

 iarly drawn to the differences of form between the sentences 

 of More, Hooker, Lyly, and other early prosaists, and of ap- 

 proved stylists in our own age. Here was clearly an organic 

 and sustained development, yet without scientific recognition 

 of a single fact or principle of change. It seemed that 

 something might easily be done towards determining the 

 course of an evolution so evident and remarkable. But I 

 had, or believed I had, no leisure for serious study of the 

 subject, and found my interest inadequate to more than fitful 

 theorizing as to what might one day be found at bottom. 

 Certain phases in the development seemed probable enough, 

 and from time to time I ventured talking incidentally to my 

 classes concerning che structural reforms which must have 

 preceded or enabled the simplicity and energy of our best 

 modern prose. This was in reahty, of course, much as if 

 some barber surgeon of the middle age had assayed to divine 

 and declare the processes of organic chemistry or embry- 

 ology, and I think I realized the absurdity of it to some 

 degree. At length it occurred to me it should be no long task 

 at least to ascertain approximately how much the English 

 sentence had shortened since the beginnings of modern prose. 

 So I began simply counting the nvmiber of words in the 

 periods of Chaucer, Fabyan, Ascham, Spenser, Lyly, and 

 Joseph Hall, in order to determine an average for each and 

 for the period in general, as means of comparison with later 

 times. In this attempt I reahzed at once, what I had failed 

 to comprehend before, that the punctuation in early writers 

 is often signally false to both form and sense, therefore could 



University Studies, Vol. I., No. 4, July, 1892. 337 



