Scarica English Language I - Prof.ssa Plescia e più Sintesi del corso in PDF di Lingua Inglese solo su Docsity!
A HISTORY OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE
The Renaissance was an important period for the English language, from 1500 to
- Indeed, it was as if English was searching for its modern identity. During this period, the printing press arrived, leading to greater circulation of books and consequently greater literacy. Travel, trade, and contact intensified, thus creating a greater need for understanding between different cultures. This led to a greater awareness of the language , and discussions about what the English language should be like, a kind of public debate about the language. Greater importance was placed on vocabulary and grammar , which, however, became more conservative. The English language, like other vernacular languages, faced three challenges :
- Recognition , gaining acceptance. Latin was the language of knowledge and serious culture , so English had to live up to it. Richard Mulcaster , Head Master of
the Merchant Taylor's School, wrote in 1582, " But why not all in English, […] I do not
think that any language, […] I love Rome, but London better, I favor Italy, but England
more, I honor the Latin, but I worship the English." A true declaration of love and trust
for English, he asked why not use it. Translations were essential in demonstrating what the English language was capable of.
- Spelling , which was a total mess, as the same word was spelled a thousand different ways. With printing, greater consistency and uniformity were needed.
- Enrichment : more words were needed to speak more precisely. This led to the explosion of vocabulary , which was the most visible transformation. All these new words were essentially borrowed from other languages, such as Latin, French, Greek, Italian, and Spanish. This was a massive and deliberate importation. Not everyone was happy, however. One example is the famous controversy over " inkhorn terms ," considered too elaborate and forced, and criticized by purists like Sir John Checke who wanted a purer English. Others, like George Petty , defended them, arguing that loanwords exist in all languages. Still others, like Thomas Wilson , parodied them to criticize their overuse. The solution was a compromise : accepting their use but without excess. Many words criticized at the time, like "atmosphere," are now used daily. To manage this influx of new and difficult words, dictionaries were born. The first was "A Table Alphabeticall of Hard Words ," by Robert Cawdrey , which focused precisely on difficult words that were often loanwords; it was more of a glossary. The poet Spenser , on the other hand, sought to collect ancient and Chaucerian words. Regarding spelling , there were phonetically-based reform proposals from people like Smith and Harth , who invented new letters, but they had little success. A more pragmatic approach prevailed, that of Mulcaster , who proposed basing on the usage and custom of educated writers , avoiding rigid rules. It worked.
Another enormous but hidden change was in pronunciation , with the " great vowel shift ." It was a slow process, spanning two centuries ( 1400-1600 ), but systematic. It modified the pronunciation of all the long vowels in English, such as the long A in the word Name. This is why English is written one way but often read another. Grammar changed, but less radically; more likely, it settled down. One important change was the disappearance of " thou ," replaced by " you ." There was a move toward greater formality. " Its " was born in place of the possessive " his ," used for people and things. " Who " also became established as a relative pronoun. The ending –s in the third person singular present tense, from “-th” to “-s,” was more gradual. Shakespeare is the perfect reflection of this period. He experienced the changes and knew many terms, using both loanwords and ordinary words, even though many have different meanings than today. For example, “communicate” meant not just speaking, but also sharing something physically. His language is rich and fluid. The awareness of that period is important; intellectuals and writers actively debated how they wanted their language to be, which is something we take for granted today. MEMORIA DI SHAKESPEARE EDITOR’S FOREWORD
Plescia uses a clear expression: " A significant shift has occurred [...] to approaches
that apply tools commonly used in modern linguistics." This means taking the tools of
today's linguistics , which studies language scientifically , and applying them to Shakespeare to understand style and form in new ways. So it's no longer just about admiring the beauty of the text, but about trying to understand how it works technically. It's about using disciplines like historical linguistics to gain a thorough understanding of the English of the period or stylistics. We're looking for specific, quantifiable traits that distinguish the language used by Shakespeare compared to his contemporaries.
Kalpeper quotes: " Much remains to do." This research is in full swing. And this highly
analytical approach also has another, corrective function , " a healthy corrective
measure against the worst kind of bardolatry." Bardolatry is that somewhat uncritical
veneration of Shakespeare as an isolated, almost superhuman genius who created the English language from nothing. A very romantic image, but unrealistic from a linguistic or historical perspective. Rigorous linguistic analysis helps to debunk this myth somewhat, casting doubt on the idea of a genius born in a vacuum. The focus shifts to context ; scholars today are
more interested in understanding the linguistic " tool kit" Shakespeare had at his
disposal, which words were used, which grammatical rules, what the linguistic culture was like. Therefore, seeing him as a user of that culture , not as its sole inventor. Plescia introduces an important distinction, taken from David Crystal: the language used in Shakespearean texts, and the somewhat vague idea of Shakespeare's language as a purely his own creation. Therefore, the language we find in his works is a privileged vantage point for studying the English of that era, but always within that context.
Culperer highlights the importance of corpora , also arguing that we no longer focus solely on how a word is spelled but also on how it is used in the context of the time. It's like using statistics to understand the language of the past. This approach leads us straight to the myth that Shakespeare invented thousands of new words.
Who Invented “Gloomy”? Lies People Want to Believe about Shakespeare - Jonathan
Hope
Hope gives us a spoiler: " Spoiler alert: Shakespeare did not invent an unusual number
of words." He debunks this myth, saying it stems from a misinterpretation of the
" first citations," the first attestations of words recorded in the OED. For a long time, it
was thought that the words recorded there were used there and by that person for the first time ever , but that's not the case. Finding the actual first use is impossible. This myth has persisted for a long time, however, because it fits with the romantic idea of the author as inventor.
“ Our model of poetic genius stems from a Romantic view of the writer (one rather
alien to Renaissance notions of writing) which stresses originality, and ‘newness’.
What could better confirm our sense of Shakespeare’s superiority to other writers than
the notion that he ‘creates’, in some substantial way, modern English?”
New digital tools make research easier, and Hope analyzes several terms, taking inspiration from a list that went viral on The Huffington Post ( 13 Words You Probably Didn't Know Were Invented By Shakespeare ). For example, " eyeball " seems very Shakespearean, but we find it in a text by William Pattern ( Calendar of Scripture , 1575). Shakespeare was a child at the time. Hope, using the updated OED, demonstrates that other words normally associated with Shakespeare, such as " gloomy, fashionable, manager ...", already existed. "Manager," for example, is found in John Leslie in 1572, in his " A Treatise of Treasons ." The same goes for "Radiance," which Christopher Marlowe uses in 1593. "Critical" was attested as early as 1569. "Laughable" was attested in Shakespeare, but Hope cautions that we can't be 100% certain. But if Shakespeare wasn't an inventor of words, where does his greatness lie? By freeing ourselves from the obsession with the quantity of invented words, we can appreciate their quality. His true skill lies in giving new meaning to old words , using common words in new and surprising ways , creating astonishing effects.
Comparing Syntactic Strategies for Proximity and Distance in the Verse/Prose
Comedies of Shakespeare and Jonson - Michael Ingham, Richard Ingham
They compare Shakespeare with Jonson , and a surprising picture emerges. They focus on a very specific phenomenon: the inversion of verb and subject when the
subject is a pronoun , the so-called V2 construction, as in " five summers have I
spent." In Jonson's time, this construction was already perceived as archaic , not
colloquial. Shakespeare, however, uses it more than Jonson, so syntactically, Shakespeare appears more conservative than his contemporary Jonson.
The Inghams, however, link this construction to the setting of the plays; Jonson uses a syntax closer to the spoken language of his time, because his plays are set in his own time ( here and now ). While Shakespeare favored exotic , historical settings far from his time ( there and then ), he maintains more archaic syntactic features , creating distance from the present. It was therefore a conscious choice.
The Pragmatics of Dialogical Asides in Shakespeare - Roberta Mullini
Another Shakespearean characteristic is the " aside ." It's as if a character is talking to himself , addressing another character on stage, but ignoring the others present. Using pragmatics and conversational analysis, Mullini shows how Shakespeare shapes these asides according to dramatic needs. He highlights several categories:
- Conspiracy. Antonio and Sebastian in The Tempest plan Alonso's murder.
11 ANTONIO. (aside to Sebastian) I am right glad that he’s [King Alonso] so out of
hope.
12 Do not for one repulse forgo the purpose
13 That you resolved t’effect
L’aside qui serve per condividere un piano segreto.
- Communication on a different level. Again in The Tempest , Prospero speaks with the spirit Ariel, whom the other human characters cannot hear, thus creating a privileged and magical channel of communication.
PROSPERO. (aside to Ariel) My tricksy spirit!
- Critical or cynical comment. In Henry VI Part III, Richard and his brother George sarcastically comment on King Edward's hasty courtship of Lady Grey.
21 RICHARD OF GLOUCESTER. (aside to George) Ay, widow? Then I’ll warrant you all
your lands
22 And if what pleases him shall pleasure you.
23 Fight closer, or, good faith, you’ll catch a blow.
- Peculiar facial expressions , as if one character were trying to attract another's attention. This is the case of Menas in Anthony and Cleopatra , who during a banquet tries to speak to Pompey and pulls him away from another general conversation.
36 MENAS. (aside to Pompey) Pompey, a word.
POMPEY. (aside to Menas) Say in mine ear; what is ‘t?
37 MENAS (aside to Pompey) Forsake thy seat, I do beseech thee, captain,
38 And hear me speak a word.
The step between Rome and Egypt is a short one, and in Shakespeare's work, the dialogue between the two civilizations appears as a failed dialogue , as we see in Anthony and Cleopatra , through the emblematic figure of Enobarbus. Enobarbus is endowed with psychological depth and appears as the narrator of the story ; he embodies the failed dialogue between the civilized and austere Roman West and the sensual and fascinating Egyptian Eas t. His description of Cleopatra is famous, seen both as a descriptive masterpiece and a celebration of the other. Furthermore, Egypt influenced Rome with its symbols , such as sphinxes and obelisks. Shakespeare uses this historical dynamic to reflect on themes of power and gender , depicting Cleopatra with Anthony's sword as a reversal of roles. Shakespeare also reflects on the cultural changes that arise from the clash of civilizations. It also highlights the bitter irony of the Pax Romana , proclaimed by Octavian at the end of the tragedy, a peace born from civil war. In the play, Enobarbus has seen and understood the entire cultural, political, and personal game, but he is crushed by it and dies of remorse for having betrayed Antony, who embodied the fusion between Rome and Egypt. SHAKESPEARE AND LANGUAGE Juliet expresses the true essence of words and names, which are detached from the person and the true essence of things. Montegue is a sound , a social formality, but it doesn't reveal who Romeo really is. This is one of the two currents that permeated the Renaissance. The other is the Platonic or Adamidic vision (linked to Adam in Eden), which suggested a magical connection between words and things. Adam in Eden gives
names to animals " for how soeuer ye man named ye liuing creature, so was the name
therof." Whatever name man gave, the true name, the original one, had been given
before the fall and was not random. These names reflected the divine essence of creatures. So on the one hand, we have names as social labels and names as a reflection of essence. These two opposing ideas coexisted in constant tension. On the one hand, education of the time was based on rhetoric , which taught people to discuss the pros and cons of each issue, so exploring different ideas was the norm. On the other hand, however, the Platonic idea of an almost magical language was fascinating.
Hope speaks of " the dream of being able to do things with language." Hope defines
" the tongue" as " the organ of speech," meaning that for the Renaissance, language
was primarily the spoken word ; writing came later, a secondary technology.
" Words are the images of cogitations, and letters are the images of words." They come
in order: things in the world, then ideas (cogitations), then spoken words (words), then the letters that transcribe the sounds of spoken words (letters). This linked spoken language to the soul and the divine, while writing was less alive, useful but not the true language. Hence the importance of rhetoric, the art of speaking well, orally.
If languages are human conventions , then they are ultimately all equal. No language is by nature greater than another, since all rules arise from custom.
Hauarte states it clearly: " For in them all, may the sciences be taught, and in each is
to be said and expressed, that which by the other is inferred." Each language can
teach the sciences and express what can be said in another, a very modern and relativistic idea. However, this went against the idea of Adam's perfect language and did not explain why so many different languages existed. Here comes the myth of the Tower of Babel , Genesis 11, God punishing the
arrogance of men by confusing their single language " confounde their language, that
euery one perceive not others speach." The logical consequence was that all
linguistic variations were seen as a sign of the fall , a departure from the original perfection. They were all corrupt languages. Hauarte then gives in a bit, suggesting that perhaps there is a " reasonably instinct " that makes us connect sounds and ideas. He tells the funny anecdote of a Spanish writer who searches for a name for a hideous giant and finally finds inspiration in a servant's words, " tra qui tantos " (there are so many), a sound he finds perfect for his ferocity. Hauarte makes another essential distinction for understanding the value placed on language. He says that learning words requires above all memory , and memory was considered a mental faculty inferior to intellect, which is why less educated people learn foreign languages more easily and have good memories. Learning words, however, is different from knowing how to use them , which requires intellect.
" Languages (says Aristotle) cannot be gathered out by reason, nor consist in discourse
or disputations," they are learned by memory. The fundamental difference is
" discourse ," the reasoned use of words, which distinguished humans from animals and from those who parroted sentences without understanding them.
Ben Jonson , Shakespeare's contemporary, puts it bluntly: " Language most shewes a
man: speake that I may see thee." Language reveals man; it is the mirror of the mind.
Language, understood as discourse, is what creates society, and Jonson calls it the
" instrument of society." Losing this capacity means losing humanity. One example is
Ajax , who rejects rational dialogue , becoming a " land-fish ," a monster without language. Another example is Cassio in Othello , who, drunk, speaks like a parrot and loses his reputation. Even the madness of Ophelia in Hamlet , whose speech breaks and she slips out of society.
In Romeo and Juliet , Mercutio says, “ Now art thou sociable, now art thou Romeo;
now art thou what thou art, by art as well as by nature.” Here, “ art ” is technical
artifice , and is seen positively because it allows Romeo to be sociable again. Nature is associated with simplicity , almost idiocy; in fact, at the time, a “natural” was a simpleton. In the Renaissance, artifice, the ability to use language, was a sign of intelligence. This leads to another Shakespeare play, “ Love’s Labour’s Lost ,” where a messenger, Marcadé (reminiscent of Mercury , the god of eloquence ), arrives with news of a death. The women then reject the men’s superficial promises, calling
their language empty. The play ends with an isolated phrase, “ The words of Mercury
are harsh after the songs of Apollo.” Mercury vs. Apollo , once again artifice vs.
nature. Mercury could represent eloquence , but also silence in the face of death,
In the first presentation there is a kind of curly brackets , it is also a stage direction , it means that it is partially present in the msnuscript. They can indicate something that the editor is addi ng, or hypotising. The other brackets indicate lacuna. The manuscript could be corrupted , damaged. In the first scene, we are in the conflict between Londoners and foreigners , called aliens , a term that previously meant "non-subjects." They are the Lombards (a generic term for Italians) and the French. We see the Frenchman de Barde trying to kidnap Doll Williamson , wife of the
carpenter Williamson , telling her, " Thou art my prize." Immediately afterward,
another stranger, Caveler , steals pigeons from Doll's husband. She reacts forcefully to
Barde, " Hands off, proud stranger, or by him that bought me, if men's milky hearts
dare not strike a stranger, yet women will beat them down, ere they bear these
abuses." She is a strong figure , who contrasts with the men who seem more
hesitant. Lincoln and the Betts brothers arrive, who are organizing a protest. He has
prepared a " bill of our wrongs," with language rich in pathos: " For so it is that aliens
and strangers eat the bread from the fatherless children, and take the living from all
the artificers." It is an economic xenophobia , and Lincoln wants to unite the
commons, the ordinary citizens. There are terms like " intercourse " for commerce, which is a Latinism from intercursus , or " premises ," a legal Latinism.
The protest risks escalating; Betts wants to turn May Day into a riot , " make it the
worst May Day for the strangers they've ever seen." This is a reference to Evil May
Day , a xenophobic riot that actually occurred in London in 1517 , which the play dramatizes.
The tone changes completely; we're in court , and More is a sheriff. There's a pickpocket, Lifter , but Judge Suresby scolds the victim for having too
much money on him: " I tell thee plain, it is a shame for thee, With such a sum to
tempt necessity." More, however, doesn't agree and with great cunning convinces
Lifter to pickpocket the judge, promising him clemency. Lifter does so, also explaining
the techniques: " There be, sir, several very cunning fellows That while you stand and
look them in the face Will have your purse" while he steals the judge's purse.
Here we find the rhetorical figure of irony , with More repeating his own words to the
judge: " 'Fore God it is a shame With such a sum to tempt necessity." There are also
technical terms and Latinisms such as "indicted," "convinte," "plaintiff," Latinisms, and "felony" (of Franco-Norman origin). More at the end of the scene he returns the bag and concludes with a maxim on
prudence “ Wisdom still [doth bid ye watch] the door.”
Let's return to the social tension. The nobles Shrewsbury and Surrey discuss
popular discontent. Shrewsbury says, " I do not like this frowning vulgar brow."
Referring to the people, he worries about an impending riot, which arrives soon.
Surrey then proposes More as a solution, " one of the sheriffs, a wise and learned
gentleman, And in especial favor with the people." They see him as the only one
capable of using persuasion rather than force. Thus ends the first act. ACT 2 We are in the heart of the riot , and these are scenes attributed to Shakespeare.
The crowd is armed, even Doll is " in a shirt of mail, a headpiece, sword, and buckler."
Lincoln, pregnant with violence, exclaims, " Add rage to resolution; fire the houses Of
these audacious strangers!"
However, there are also doubts ; for example, Sherwin fears for the city, while Doll proposes beating the strangers. The hatred is unanimous, but the tactics diverge. The language is popular and violent.
First scene: introduces to the first clash. John Lincoln is an English man who create a rebellion to gain the king attention. Before they try a different tactic, write a letter to the authorities. The play complicates the scene by giving example of strangers (?), and in this case Th omas more defends the rights of strangers and all the human being, by saying that it i s necessary to be tolerating people. Some groups tried to escape like French that went to London and Italian Lombards (from Alps) who were persecuted for their abilities in financial, they w ere bankers. They are economical/religious immigrants. For diplomatic reasons the king guaranteerights to these strangers because he want ed to keep good relationships with this societies in order to gain privilegies. Some Engl ish people felt oppressed. The purpose of this scene is to show conflict. Linguistic form: editor interventions/conjectures in brackets.
V. 1 whither wilt thou hale me?
Doll is scared, she is saying that he his pulling her like a fish
In the same scene, there's the case of Faulkner , a troublemaker who refuses to cut his hair for a vow. More wittily sentences him to prison until he cuts it. There's a pun on "hair." Faulkner relents and cuts off his thick hair, and More tells him he has less hair but more wit. Aesop is also quoted.
More organizes a house play for his guests, enacting " the marriage of Wit and Wisdom ." When the actor playing Good Counsel is late, More comes onstage and improvises his part, advising Wit not to be deceived by Lady Vanity, mistaking her for Lady Wisdom. It's a meta-theatrical scene with a message: wit must follow wisdom , a theme that foreshadows More's own future choices. The act ends with More punishing a dishonest servant, demonstrating his justice even in small matters. ACT 4 The political situation changes, More's conscience versus the King's will.
We are in the Privy Council , discussing foreign policy. Palmer then arrives with the
King's articles to sign. Bishop Fisher refuses, " My heart will check my hand while I do
write: Subscribing so, I were a hypocrite," and is arrested. More also refuses, asking
for time, but also resigns, " Sir, tell his Highness I entreat some time for to bethink me
of this task. In the meanwhile I do resign my office into my Sovereign's hands." He is
placed under house arrest. The conflict between loyalty to the King and conscience is open. Tilney, the censor, has cut part of More's speech, perhaps too explicit. "Subscribe" is a Latinism, "articles" is a political-legal term, "capital-contempt" is legal jargon. The language becomes more formal and tense.
We are in More's house with a somber atmosphere. He tries to be ironic , but must tell
his family that he has lost his title. " Lordship? No, wife, that's gone. The ground was
slight that we did lean upon."
More exhorts his family to virtue and quotes Seneca, " Ubi turpis est medicina, sanari
piget," which means "when the cure is shameful, one hates to be cured."
Fisher is taken to the tower but is serene.
The nobles Surrey and Shrewsbuy return to arrest More for high treason.
There is an ambiguous moment in which More seems to give in: " I have bethought me,
And I'll now satisfy the King's good pleasure," but it is ironic.
" I will subscribe to go unto the Tower With all submissive willingness, and thereto add
My bones to strengthen the foundation Of Julius Caesar's palace. Now, my lord, I'll
satisfy the King even with my blood." The arrest is carried out by Downes , whom
More had helped, with much pathos.
Roper quotes Seneca again: " Curae leves loquuntur, ingentes stupent," light worries
speak, enormous ones fall silent. ACT 5 Road to the scaffold.
More arrives at the tower. Meanwhile, he meets a poor woman who asks him for help,
but he says, " But the King has ta'en the matter into his own hand; He has all I had.
Then, woman, sue to him. I cannot help thee; thou must bear with me."—a symbol of
the loss of earthly power. Then there is a dialogue with the tower doorman, and he accepts prison serenely:
" God is as strong here as he is abroad."
The faithful servants praise More and discover his generosity in his will.
A final meeting with his family, in the cell. More comforts them, reaffirming his faith
and inner peace: " Wife, so I have, and I do leave you all. To his protection hath the
power to keep You safer than I can."
Final scene. More maintains his spirits to the end, forgives the executioner , and
gives him a tip. He makes macabre jokes about his short neck and beard: " My neck is
so short that if you shouldst behead an hundred noblemen like myself, you wouldst
ne'er get credit by it" and again : "One thing more: take heed thou cutst not off my
beard."
He doesn't speak of his "offense," but defines himself as a " stage player ," an actor,
affirming his hope in heaven: " I shall break from you, and fly up to heaven. Let's seek
the means for this."
His final words before dying are a testament to faith and courage : " Here More
forsakes all mirth, good reason why: The fool of flesh must with her frail life die. No
eye salute my trunk with a sad tear. Our birth to heaven should be thus: void of fear."
It's a powerful ending. "scaffold" = patibolo, "doublet" = farsetto, "trunk" = decapitated trunk/body. THINK ON MY WORD
It must be remembered, however, that the Elizabethan period was a time of great linguistic ferment. There were many loanwords from other languages, many spontaneous lexical creations , partly because there were no normative dictionaries. And perhaps the most interesting question is not how many he invented, but why he invented that word at that time? " Vast ," for example, already existed, but in Henry V he adds nuance, an almost unnatural, immeasurable breadth.
- Translation Myth ; Many find Shakespeare difficult, to the point that some propose translating it into modern English. But Crystal's analysis firmly disputes this idea. A fundamental distinction must be made between the difficulty of language and the difficulty of thought. Sometimes it's the concept that's complex , even when
expressed in simple words. Think of " to be or not to be": the words are simple, but the
concept is not. The purely linguistic difficulty is actually less insurmountable than one might think. According to Crystal's estimates, the grammar has changed by about 10%. And only about 5% of the vocabulary has changed in a truly significant way. There are words that are incomprehensible today without a glossary. But the biggest pitfall is the so-called false friends , words that seem familiar to us, but had a different meaning back then. "Merely" sounds like "merely," but actually meant totally. Or "naughty" meant wicked, evil. "Ecstasy" could mean madness. Crystal argues that, since 90% of the language is already familiar , it doesn't make much sense to translate or oversimplify. He uses a strong expression, " dumbing down ," meaning impoverishing the text.
- Style Myth : The idea of a unique Shakespearean style is another simplification. Style, if we understand it as the sum of an author's linguistic choices and characteristics, varies. Linguists call it diachronic variation , and the genre of the work—comedy, tragedy, historical drama—changes depending on the context, while the character speaking and the topic being discussed are synchronic variations. These choices affect everything, even the interaction between characters. Like the choice between the informal "thou" and the formal "you." So searching for Shakespeare's style is a futile endeavor. Certain linguistic habits can be identified. It's much more useful to make specific comparisons: How does Hamlet speak compared to Ophelia? How does the style of a comedy differ from that of a tragedy? How does the language evolve from the more immature early works to the more mature later ones? These targeted comparisons truly reveal the mastery. PHONOLOGY So, if there isn't a single style, let's try to better understand the tools of this language , starting from the sounds , but we have little direct evidence on precise intonation. However, from the texts, we understand that Shakespeare was very attentive to the quality of the voice. He often refers to high or low voices , strong or weak , fast or slow. Rhythm is fundamental, because English is a language based on accents —linguists call it stress-timed—not on syllables, like Italian or French. In theater, the key difference is between prose , which is more rhythmically liberating , and verse , which instead has a meter , which has two functions.
- One is the purely sonic eff ect, the musicality or sprightliness of the verse. We can call it " phonoaesthetics ." e.g., Caliban's almost tribal chant in The Tempest: "Ban' ban' Cacalyban Has a new Master, get a new Man." The rhythm here creates an atmosphere.
- The other function is to emphasize meaning. We call it " phonological ." Rhythm can highlight key words, create parallels or contrasts between words or ideas. For example, in Hamlet, after he sees the ghost, the previously regular line suddenly breaks, becoming almost sobbing. "Oh most pernicious woman! Oh Villaine, Villaine, smiling damned Villaine!" The broken rhythm perfectly reflects his inner chaos. Alliteration , as in Miranda's speech in The Tempest , when she says "bigger, bulke, bashful," also uses sound to connect important concepts. WHY PENTAMETERS? And why has iambic pentameter become so dominant in your theater?
- It seems to be a fairly natural rhythm for spoken English , not too rigid, not too far from the normal flow of conversation.
- A line of about 10 syllables with five main stresses seems to fit well with our mental processing capacity. It's not too long, not too short. But its real strength is its flexibility. It's a basic pattern that allows for a great deal of variation. There are lines that end with an extra weak syllable , the so-called " feminine ending "; there are phrases that continue into the next line, the " ejamblement "; pauses within the line, the " caesuras "; lines divided between two or more characters, the " shared lines ," which make the dialogue much more realistic, as in King John , where there are five very short measures in three lines. Crystal notes that the use of these shared lines increases in the later works. It's a sign of a growing ability to bring conversation to life on stage. VARIETIES OF LANGUAGE How can we tackle these difficult words without becoming overwhelmed? Crystal suggests a gradual approach. Many words are actually easy. Others have small formal differences , but context usually helps: "Afright" instead of "frightened" (to scare). And then there are conversions: using a word with a different grammatical function, a noun as a verb, e.g.: Lord Angelo dooks it well = he behaves like a duke. An adjective as an adverb. Often, these choices also help with meter. There are also some really difficult words ; Crystal estimates around a thousand, like "finical," which means finicky. And how do we learn them? It's helpful to group them by word families , by semantic fields , by the names of coins , by falconry terms , or through collocations.
500 b.c. The Celt inhabit much of Europe and begin to colonize the British isles. Roman were interested in control, but not with genocide as long as people paid taxes. These isles were un comfortable and nobody wanted to live there, but the Roman did not want to live there but they wanted a strong place and to be strong presence. (cerco lingue celtiche da appunti geo grafia). 55 b.c. first Roman raids on Britain under Julius Cesar. There are testimonia abo ut their presence, such as the word war. 410-436 a.d. Roman withdrawal from Britain. Their presence brought Latin pres ence in Britain, such as everyday words like Castel from castrum. They brought new war technologies. 450 a.d. Anglo Saxon settlement of Britain begins. At the time they included diff erent tribes from the nortern Europe: angles, frisians, Saxons and jutes. It was e asy for them to arrive thanks to their navigation tools and they could adapt to t he living conditions of the isles because they were not so different from theirs. I n this period there is the beginning of old English and so the end of Germanic in fluence. 450-480 a.d. Earliest old English inscriptions. First testimony of written English. 597 a.d. St Augustin arrived in Britain and there was the beginning of Christian c onversion of the Anglo Saxon. It was done thanks to the decision of some kings t o convert themselves. 660 a.d. Caedmon's hymn was composed in old English, considered as the first poem. 731 a.d. The venerable Bede writes "The ecclesiastical history of the English pe ople" in Latin. The church has always had the means to make people study. This guy was a monk, and as a monk he had lot of leasure time which he used to writ e. With this book he used for the first time the expression English people, becau se before people did not use to consider them as a united nation. 800 a.d. Old English epic poem "beowulf" was composed, it was the final act of t he Germanic literature, it held together past and present. 871 a.d. Alfred the great became king of wessex and encouraged English prose and translation of Latin works. Do ut des, be wanted peace l, he understood that poeple wanted a unique language and system of belief and values. In this perio d the languge progressed. He was an intellectual who understood that to have a national language it was necessary to have a grammar, so he wrote an English grammar. He also made translation from Latin into English of sacred texts. He w as very modern. 1066 a.d. The Norman conquest under William the conqueror. At this point there was a common language and English people saw themselves as a community wi th same language and culture. In this period language already changed consider ably and it was loosing it inflection. William was French and when he conquered England he imported many French words. 1100 a.d. London becomes de facto capital of England, there was not a state ye t. 1150 a.d. The oldest surviving manuscripts in Middle English date from this peri od. 1167 a.d. Oxford University was established.
1204 a.d. King John loses the province of Normandy to France. These kings were related with French kings but they already lost their French cultural character. 1388 a.d. Chaucer begins "the Canterbury Tales". 1399 a.d. Henry IV becomes the first English speaking monarch since before the conquest. English survived and was not involved in French languge, since also t he kings lost their French. It incorporated French words but keeping is identity a s a Germanic language. 1450 a.d. The great vowel shift. 1476 a.d. Caxton brings the first English printing press. It increses book printing s and more opportunity to enlarge the study and alphabetization. 1450 the great Vowel shift, it was an important change because it was not just l ocal but the entire phonological changed. This date is used by some histograph er to indicate the beginning of the early modern English. 1476 William Caxton establishes the first printing press. Other historiographers use this date, but this is an external fact and not cultural. 1500 start of English Renaissance. Other used it, cultural reason. DOMANDA ESAME : when did early modern English start? It depends, there are three possibilities: 1450, 1476, 1500. It depends on which criteria we use. Structural conditio n 1450 bc of great changes in the language. External factors 1476 for the print. Cultur al elements 1500 because it is the beginning of English Renaissance. 1526 tyndale translated the New testament of the Bible, it was important bc it i mported new terms and ways of thinking. 1549 book of common prayer was published, important bc gave new ways of pr aying. 1590 Shakespeare writes his first plays. DOMANDA ESAME : is it correct to say that Shakespeare invented the English langua ge? Shakespeare with the Bible were the main way of entertainment, but they did not i nvent the language. There is no person who can invent a language and impose it, it de pends on a speech community. It was invented centuries before and then it grew.* 1604 Robert Cawdrey published the first English dictionary named A Table Alph abetical. List of words and glossaries existed also before. 1607 Jamestown, the first permanent English settlement in the New World estab lished. 1611 the authorized or King James version of the bible was published. 1755 *Samuel Johnson published his dictionary of the English language, the first complete dictionary. He took lots of examples from Shakespeare, because the majority of books were written by him. People begin to think that those words h ad been invented by Shakespeare, but this is not right. 1834 abolition of slavery in the British eempire 1922 BBC was founded; British Broadcasting Corporation. It was known all over the word 1928 first edition of the Oxford English dictionary 1947 India and Pakistan gain indipendence from Britain. 1989 second edition of the English Oxford dictionary, still just paper edition. ARTICLE – SHAKESPEARE IS IN DANGER
