THE EIMES IN THE AUTHENTIC POEMS UF WILLIAM DUNBAR. 653 



i) OE. a. See § 20. 



k) OE. 5a+ g. fe : E. (NE. eye), 214, 79. 



1) OE. or ON. e (see § 42). 



m) ON. See § 96. 



n) OE. Ik or ON. ig. 



sie (see) : bysselye, 124, 40. 

 o) OF. or Lat. e., or earlier ie. 

 r) be : petie, 119, 41. scurrilite, 154, 58. 



„ : importunitie, 245, 76. 249, 23 and others. 



se : gree, 123, 5. quantite, 196, 153. 



This list, taken along with some of the 

 MSc. final e was already an i sound. 



§ 70.— EO. + W. = Grmc. iuj, iw. 



a) with itself, 

 blew : new : hew, 94, 16. new : flew (praet.), 251, 



O i , 



tnew : hew : rew, 117, 10. 345, 37. hew : grew, 

 135, 24 (see under uw, § 103). 



b) OE. u (see§ 104). 



c) OE. sew (see § 53). 



OF. ieu. se : parde, 195, 120. 

 s) OF. i. be : supple, 250, 8. 



tyred (OE. teorian) : requyred : expyred, 251, 17. 



tyre : inspyre, 266, 93. 

 t) OE. ae (see § 50). 



seis : kneis : 194, 69, and 86. 

 u) ON. eyj. 



de : be, 172, 295. 251, 33. 



„ : se, 195, 128. 

 v) ON. oe (see § 95). 



foregoing, seems to confirm the idea that 



d) OF. and Lat. u. trow : Jesu, 361, 59. 



e) OF. ii, hew : vertew, 345, 34. 



f) Fr. eu, ieu, hew : persew, 117, 6. 347, 12. 

 trew : rew : „ 262, 82. 



g) Fr. ive. new : eschew (OF. eschever, eschiver), 

 221, 9. 



h) OE. ull. 3 ow : fow, 38, 18. 



§ 70a. — EO. +g or h, rimes with 



a) OE. Eo, without guttural. 



dre (dreogan) : be, 354, 2. fe (feoh) : fre, 214, 



73. 

 theis : kneis, 194, 70. hie (heoh) : he, 295, 95 



b) OE. se, seis : theis, 194, 69. 



c) OE. and gen. e, le (leogan) : me, 82, 23. fe : he, 



214, 75. hie : me, 84, 83. 289, 75. 3e, 139, 3. 



d) OF. e. 



hie : strennite, 295, 94. le (leogan) : gre, 204, 33. 



e) OE. ea + g. fe : E (NE. eye), 214, 77. 



I- 



c) OE. 0. bescbittin, sittin, 137, 70. 



§ 71. not followed by c or g, rimes with 



a) itself, schittin : wittin, 174, 323. 



b) OF. or Lat. i, hidder : consider, 43, 84. 



Into the interesting controversy over the fortunes of OE. i and y in open syllables 

 so elaborately treated by Dr Curtis (§ 361, etc.), and by Professor Luick (§ 381, etc., 

 §515 and 530), and carefully summed up by Dr Gerken, I do not propose to enter at 

 any length, especially as Dunbar's meagre rime-list above throws no fresh light on the 

 subject. As to the quality of the OE. i-sound, is not Dr Curtis (following Ellis, 

 EP -> P- 105 ) g° m g rather far in asserting that this sound is in all cases not a pure 

 sound, but partakes of the e quality, as in NE ? Is it not more likely that the case in 

 Anglo-Saxon was, as in modern German, that the sound varied according to the adjacent 

 nsonants ? I found this remark on what I have observed in teaching German students 

 inglish, viz., on a tendency they have to introduce the pure t'-sound in certain words, but 

 t in others. I have often had to correct them for introducing it into a word like with, 

 )ut have never noticed it in words like in, sin, wind, etc. I have unfortunately made 

 ) notes on this point, but I think there is no doubt that this sound tends to vary 

 3ordmg to the following consonant. In modern English we have practically no pure 

 sound, but m Scotch we have it in words like wi (with), pity, city, etc., though the 

 last two words have often a long vowel. Better examples would be the forms pitiful, 



VOL. XXXIX. PART III. (NO. 2ft). 5 H 



