chaucer's influence of the english language
... “g” in the word “sign”. Numerous other observations on consonants in Chaucer’s English could be made, but a useful rule of thumb is, when in doubt, pronounce the consonant (Baugh, 24). These spelling and pronunciation differences, due to the French influence shown in Chaucer’s writings, will be discussed further when discussing Romance borrowings, which ultimately depicts what really is Chaucerian English. Among the chief differences between Chaucer’s English and ours are the effects of the Great Vowel Shift. As a result of this Shift, the pronunciation of English long vowels was raised, except for i and u, which became diphthongs. To pronounce Chaucer’s English, then, one would go back behind the Great Vowel Shift, and this means that we pronounce his vowels in much the same way that the vowels of French, German, and Italian are pronounced today. The following table exemplifies the approximate pronunciation of Chaucer’s vowels and diphthongs (Baugh, 12): Sound Pronunciation Spelling Examples â like a in father a, aa fader, caas a like a in what a what ç like a in mate e, ee swete, neede æ like e in there e, ee bere, heeth e like e in met e hem ә like a in about e yonge î like i in machine i,y blithe, nyce i like i in bit I, y list, nyste ọ like o in so o, oo dom, roote o like o in cloth o, oo lore, goon o like o in or o for û like oo in root ou, ow hous, how u like oo in book u, o ful, none ü like French u in tu u vertu au like ow in how au, aw cause, drawe Seeing these pronunciation and usage in the words is important when looking at Chaucerian literature, for a written standardization is based on Chaucer. Chaucer’s English was inflected in the nouns, the genitive singular and the plural end usually in –es, sometimes in –is. This, used by Chaucer, influenced the later phenomenon in Modern English, where the genitive singular ends in‘s and many plural end in s (Speirs, 12). Adjectives also in Chaucer’s English are declined, in keeping with what are termed strong and weak declensions. “The weak declension shows a final –e when the adjective is preceded by a demonstrative, a definite article, or a possessive pronoun” (Speirs, 13). Hence Chaucer would say “yong man” but “the yonge man.” Some adjectives always have a final –e (e.g., “swete”), and all adjectives strong or weak, have a final –e in the plural form (Speirs, 12). Another main component to Chaucerian literature was the use of the final –e that in later English ceased to be pronounced (Speirs, 11). What makes this important to discuss is though they don’t exist today, it’s important for learning how Chaucer would have talked and also serves as a tool for rhyming in his poems, which will be explained further when talking about Chaucer’s meter. According to “The Language from Chaucer to Shakespeare” described on the Bartleby Web site, though this final –e died out by the 1500’s, it is probable that Chaucer’s use of the final –e was for metrical purposes- to create harmony in the rhyme scheme. Because of this influence, this value was preserved in poetry during the early fifteenth century. A point that is worth mentioning is the fact that Chaucer’s verse is not dependent purely on syllable count, but more importantly, on the alternation of stressed and unstressed syllables. While Chaucer’s verse is regularly pentameter it is sufficiently flexible to allow a degree of variation in the number of syllables, thus his usage of the final –e, which will be explained with examples when discussing his literary style. In speaking about the pronunciation, spellings and grammar of Chaucer, it becomes quite apparent that although we certainly don’t talk like Chaucer would have talked, as our speech comes after the Great Vowel Shift, but we do preserve some of the way things are pronounced and spelled, as we pronounce the “ch” like in chimney. Chaucer wrote and spoke in the fourteenth century, so it’s no doubt the language has evolved. More importantly, the evolvement really starts with Chaucer, as his writings exemplify modern English. It’s much more easier to read Chaucer’s literature than it is to read Beowulf. Chaucer was the first English poet to write down a language that is similar to ours today. A major contribution that Chaucer instilled on the English language was the vast amount of Romance borrowings. “Until Chaucer’s time, French and Latin were the languages of sophisticated literature.” Spencer regarded Chaucer as the founder of the language itself, “the well of English undefiled.” If looking through the Oxford Dictionary, it’s true. Words that were “borrowed” from Latin and French are recorded as first appearing in Chaucer’s works, as described in Benson’s “Chaucer’s Romance ‘Borrowings’” on the Harvard website. Chaucer admired many poets, in which he based some of his works on. For example, Boccacio was a major influence on Chaucer. Troilus and Criseyde was based on Boccacio’s Filostrato. The House of Fame is a reflection of Dante’s Divine Comedy, according to Brendan Brenson on his website “Biography of Chaucer.” Because Chaucer had studied these major poets and spoke French and spent a great deal of time in Italy, it becomes no wonder that the Romance vocabulary seeped into the English language. It is said that approximately 800-900 Romance words Chaucer introduced in his writings are still in effect today (Mersand, 7). It is true that there is no proof that any of the foreign words in his writings had not been used before, but as the Oxford Dictionary shows, a number of these words were not to be found in any pervious writings now extant, is really immense; to his translation of Boethius, to his work on astrology, to his prose and poems are traced to a large number of our great and important words, besides many learned terms, such as, attention, diffusion, fraction, duration, position, first found in Chaucer and then not apparently not used again till the sixteenth century (Mersand, 15). On the other hand, there is a debate amongst scholars who have either minimized the extent of Chaucer’s addition to the Romance element in English, or have not been convinced that such additions can’t be traced to the poet or believe Chaucer did incorporate much Romance borrowing into our language, but think it hurts our language. According to Matthew Harrison, critic to the use of Romance words by Chaucer, states, “Chaucer didn’t strengthen the English language, he weakened it by borrowing French and Italian words…had it not been for these addition of words and influence of Romance language, who knows that our language could have been…we could have developed a more purer English language” (Mersand, 33). My statement to this is, how close-minded can this person possibly be? One of the reasons why Chaucer is so acclaimed is because of his integration of what he knew, and what was around him and he put it down and utilized it in his texts. He laid the foundation for other writers and poets to do the same; to reach out what was beyond their surroundings, to make English rich. Chaucer essentially started what makes English strong-the fact that English is flexible enough to incorporate many languages into the English language. One of the reasons English is so widely used is because of this flexibility. According to A.W. Pollard, he dismisses altogether what he calls, the foolish talk of Chaucer’s having “corrupted English” by adopting unnecessary French words” (Mersand, 16). Pollard does not agree with those scholars who exaggerate the part Chaucer played in “making the English language.” He believes that “whatever credit is due to Chaucer for moulding our language must, therefore, be given also to Gower” (Mersand, 17). Both writers, he maintains, used the language of the educated people of their day. But according to Samuel Johnson, who appeared to have been the first of the participants in the controversy who took the trouble to read other English writers of the fourteenth century remarks: 1. Gower has many words that Chancre is said to have imported. 2. Although Chaucer’s diction is general like those of his contemporaries, Gower and Lydgate, Chaucer undoubtedly was the first to write the words down. Since no conclusion can be made about who actually used a word first, Chaucer or Gower, Chaucer is credited with these loan words because Chaucer was writing them down first. These arguments are interesting and are valid to a certain extent, considering because Chaucer’s borrowed words were so popular and being copied over and over , other poets started to use the words, thus creating a valid argument. What needs to be understood though is, though it’s okay to argue over who coined these loan words, it can’t be denied that Chaucer was the first to write them down, since there is evidence of that. In regards to the Millers’ Tale and the Reeve’s Tale, according to Mersand, have the smallest percentage of Romance words used in their tales (109), which in my opinion, according to all these statistics done showing the proportion of loan words used in these tales compared to all his other poems hold the least amount, suggests that there aren’t many romance sources for them, but native English sources. The proportion of Romance words in the vocabulary of the Reeve is only 21.7%, or half the extent of that of Troilus (109). According to Mersand, The Canterbury Tales is Chaucer’s latest work and occurred after his breaking from the courts. What can be proven from these findings is that Chaucer’s language did undergo “purification” and a revision to his more native language after his separation from court circles. Thus, by the end of Chaucer’s time, he used less and less Romance words and became more comfortable writing in the native. Maybe this is due to the fact that English was becoming more acceptable and so Chaucer started backing away from the Romance influence. It would have been interesting to see Chaucer writing after the Canterbury Tales in order to analyze and validate this statement, but based on the statistics by Mersand, indeed, by the end of Chaucer’s time, he was using less and less Romance words. In looking at the significance of borrowing of Romance words, it becomes no wonder how much this has influenced the English language. These loan words filtered through the writings of other contemporaries in his time, which shows the popularity and praise Chaucer received in doing so. Moreover, this borrowing from other languages really is the stepping-stone of other writers adopting words from other languages and inserting them into their own. Americans do it all the time. We take Spanish words and employ them in English. Chaucer was the first real advocate to have consciously written down borrowed words. Chaucer was very much aware of the problem writing sophisticated poetry in English, which not only was partly due to his adding of Romance words in the English language, but it demanded a new form of the language, based on French and Latin, called high style. Taken from the Harvard website, The Geoffrey Chaucer Page, note how heavy is the use of romance words in the General Prologue of the Canterbury Tales: Whan that Aprill with his shoures soote The droghte of March hath perced to the roote, And bathed every veyne in swich licour Of which vertu engendred is the flour; Whan Zephirus eek with his sweete breeth Inspired hath in every holt and heeth The tendre croppes, and the tonge sonne Hath in the Ram his half cours yronne… The bold romance words were words common to the language. One can see the heavy use of the French language. For example, the word Aprill comes close to the month April, Avril in French. The word tender (tender) is spelled with an “re” at the end as the French do with their words such as entendre. Also taken from this site, “words that are familiar to us were often new to Chaucer’s first audiences, lending his “high style” passages in a time that forces hard for us to recapture today, and they help define the tone of works such as The Knight’s Tale”: Than is the lilie upon his stalk grene, And fresher than the May with floures new- For with the rose colour stroof hir hewe, I noot which was the fairer of hem two… These abstractions, told eloquently with Chaucer’s use of rhyme, brought to the style a fluency that English verse had not formerly encountered. This heavy use of romance words is the major aspect to the “high style” that Chaucer’s contemporaries and followers much admired (Speirs, 126). After discussing the linguistics of Chaucer, the spelling and grammar, the spoken and standardized dialect in his time and Romance borrowings, it becomes logical, then to compile all of these influences that make him the “father of English poetry.” Chaucer was a Merlin of language. In his poetry he has locked up beauties of sound, of sense, and of rhythm. The secret of his art of employing words will probably never be discovered. That old cliché, “the ways of a genius may be analyzed but always manage to escape the scholar” rings true for those that try to analyze every aspect of Chaucer’s works. What can be said is Chaucer was an originator in regards to poetic form and a modifier in literary genres, such as the French fabliau (Damrosch, 30). Perhaps Chaucer’s Rhyme royal is one of the most known achievements Chaucer is accredited with. Surely, it is extraordinary with its highly organized structure and timeless form. His complete work Troilus and Criseyde is composed entirely in this form The Rhyme royal stanza is of seven lines, and the rhyme scheme is ababbcc. According to Bronson, though Chaucer invented the form, it is an adaptation of a French ballad stanza, called “The Ballade”, which consists of three stanzas of eight or ten lines plus a “concluding envoy” (84). Ryhme royal is perhaps called because of its relative formality (Mersand, 120). Taken from Chaucer’s Troilus and Criseyde, here is an example of his Rhyme Royal: The double sorwe of Troilus to tellen That was the kyng Priamus sone of Troye, In lovynge, how his aventures fellen Fro wo to wele, and after out of joie, My purpos is, er hat I parte fro ye. Thesiphone, thow help me for t’endite This woful vers, that wepen as I write. In this little passage, conclusions can be drawn about the poet. First, going back to inflectional endings, he uses them in order to rhyme. As in joie, ye, t’endite, write. The final –e would be pronounced. Though this died out, Chaucer utilizes these endings to the fullest in order to make the most of Rhyme royal and allows for the beat of the poem to come through. Interestingly, some scholars such as Horobin, point out that the dropping of the final –e could have been due to the scribes not understanding Chaucer’s technicalities and reasoning for the inflexion, and thus omitted it when copying texts (22). This makes much sense, considering the scribes erratic practices of copying down the meters make it impossible to say how essential a part this was of the inflexional system of the original language, which was why sometimes in different translations, an –e would be added and sometimes there wouldn’t be one (Horobin, 23). But considering the scribes weren’t writing them down, probably means that Chaucer utilized the dieing inflexional system as a means for rhyming purposes, as he does it over and over again. Chaucer’s Rhyme royal had some later influences, as Edmund Spencer created his nine-line Spenserian stanza, used in the Fairie Queene based on Chaucer’s stanza. “Lydgate also used the form frequently, especially in his loves poems and in versus for royal coronations and other such occasions, all described in Stephen Reimer’s Web Site “The Canon of John Lydate Project.” Not only did Chaucer develop a poetic form, later contemporaries learned and mimicked his form making his influence on the language even more prevalent. One of Chaucer’s favorite things to do was play with the language, which couldn’t be done before. He fills his poetry with puns, metaphors, similes, and utilizes the variations of singular and plural forms of the second person pronoun in order to play with the language. The significance of variation in use of singular and plural forms of the second person pronoun in Middle English is well known in Chaucer English. When addressing a group of individuals the plural pronoun “ye” is used. Where a socially inferior individual is being addressed the singular form “thyn” is employed, whereas the plural form is required to express deference when addressing a social superior. Within courtly relationships husband and wife refer to each other using the plural form, reserving the singular form for moments of intensity and intimacy. This is perhaps best indicated by Criseyde’s dramatic switch to the singular pronoun in addressing Troilus: “For I am thyn, by God and by my trouthe” (Horobin, 114). The singular pronoun, according to Horobin, may also be used to show a lack of respect or even contempt to an addressee. Chaucer plays with the use of pronouns in order to stir up confliction in the writings. What is mostly seen in Chaucer’s literature is that Chaucer writes about the people and situations in his society at his time. In the Canterbury Tales, Damrosch talks about the poem being the “culmination” of Chaucer’s dramatic-poetic development of English speech; and something unaccountable new in mediaeval literature. The personae are first presented in the great Prologue with a vividness not attained before in English (Damrosch, 98). Thereafter, in the comic interludes between the tales, they begin to move and talk and act. The Wife of Bath’s introduction is the Wife herself talking, enacting scenes and dialogues between herself and her several husbands, and dramatizing her personal life in front of an audience. Therefore, the poem is the beginning of English dramatic and fictional literature as a whole. Thus, Chaucer’s literature becomes reflective of the people in his society. Stories of earlier times began to move away from the “larger than life” type and because of Chaucer, stories started to focus on characterization, reflect the attitudes of the time, as well as the philosophies at the time, as seen in Troilus and Criseyde where Boethius’ Consolation of Philosophie is a constant theme in the work. Chaucer was able to incorporate the world around him in a stylistic approach unknown up until his time. Speirs argues in his book that Chaucer’s work Troilus and Criseyde can be called “a novel in verse” (49). Chaucer is here, as in the Canterbury Tales, poet, dramatist, and novelist in one. The scenes of the Chaucerian human comedy have a vividness and immediacy, which resemble that of Shakespearia...