We see, therefore, that _'ch'ud, ch'am,_ and _'ch'ill_, are simply the Anglo-Saxon _ich_, contracted and combined with the respective verbs _would, am,_ and _will_; that the _'c'_ and _'ch'_, as quoted in the lines given by Miss Ham, are contracts for the Anglo-Saxon _iche_ or _I_, and nothing else. It may be also observed, that in more than one modern work containing specimens of the dialect of Scotland and the North of England, and in, I believe, some of Sir Walter Scott's novels, the word _ise_ is employed, so that the auxiliary verb _will_ or _shall_ is designed to be included in that word; and the printing or it thus, _I'se_, indicates that it is so designed to be employed. Now, if this be a _copy_ of the _living_ dialect of Scotland (which I beg leave respectfully to doubt), it is a "barbarism" which the Somerset dialect does not possess. The _ise_ in the west is simply a p.r.o.noun and nothing else; it is, however, often accompanied by a contracted verb, as _ise'll_ for I will.

In concluding these observations on the first personal p.r.o.noun it may be added, that the object of the writer has been to state facts, without the accompaniment of that _learning_ which is by some persons deemed so essential in inquiries of this kind. The best learning is that which conveys to us a knowledge of facts.

Should any one be disposed to convince himself of the correctness of the _data_ here laid before him, by researches among our old authors, as well as from living in the west, there is no doubt as to the result to which lie must come. Perhaps, however, it may be useful to quote one or two specimens of our more early Anglo- Saxon, to prove their a.n.a.logy to the present dialect in Somersetshire.

The first specimen is from _Robert of Gloucester_, who lived in the time of Henry II., that is, towards the latter end of the twelfth century; it is quoted by _Drayton_, in the notes to his _Pulyolbion_, song xvii.

"The meste wo that here _vel_ bi King Henry's days, In this lond, _icholle_ beginne to tell _yuf ich_ may."

_Vel_, for fell, the preterite of to fall, is precisely the sound given to the same word at the present time in Somersetshire.

We see that _icholle_, for _I shall_, follows the same rule as the contracts _'ch'ud, 'ch'am_, and _'ch'ill_.

It is very remarkable that _sholl_, for shall, is almost invariably employed in Somersetshire, at the present time.

_Yuf_ I am disposed to consider a corruption or mistake for _gyf_ (give), that is, _if_, the meaning and origin of which have been long ago settled by Horne Tooke in his Purley.

The next specimen is a.s.suredly of a much more modern date; though quoted by _Mr Dibdin_, in his _Metrical History of England_, as from an _old ballad_.

"_Ch'ill_ tell thee what, good fellow, Before the vriars went hence, A bushel of the best wheate Was zold for vourteen pence, And vorty egges a penny, That were both good and new, And this _che_ say myself have seene, And yet I am no Jew."

With a very few alterations, indeed, these lines would become the _South_ Somerset of the present day.

No. II.--ER, EN, A--IT HET--THEEAZE, THEEAZAM, THIZZAM--THIC, THILK--TWORDM--WORDN--ZINO.

There are in _Somersetshire_ (besides that particular, portion in the _southern_ parts of the country in which the Anglo-Saxon _iche_ or _utchy_ and its contracts prevail) _two_ distinct and very different dialects, the boundaries of which are strongly marked by the River _Parret_. To the east and north of that river, and of the town of Bridgewater, a dialect is used which is essentially, (even now) the dialect of all the peasantry of not only that part of Somersetshire, but of Dorsetshire, Wiltshire, Gloucestershire, Hampshire, Surrey, Suss.e.x, and Kent; and even in the suburban village of _Lewisham_, will be found many striking remains of it. There can be no doubt that this dialect was some centuries ago the language of the inhabitants of all the south and of much of the west portion of our island; but it is in its greatest _purity_[Footnote: Among other innumerable proofs that Somersetshire is one of the strongholds of our old Anglo-Saxon, are the sounds which are there generally given to the vowels A and E. A has, for the most part, the same sound as we give to that letter in the word _father_ in our polished dialect: in the words tall, call, ball, and vall (fall), &c., it is thus p.r.o.nounced. The E has the sound which we give in our polished dialect to the a in pane, cane, &c., both which sounds, it may be observed, are even _now_ given to these letters on the Continent, in very many places, particularly in Holland and in Germany. The name of Dr. Gall, the founder of the science of phrenology, is p.r.o.nounced Gall, as we of the west p.r.o.nounce tall, ball, &c.] and most abundant in the county of Somerset. No sooner, however, do we cross the _Parret_ and proceed from Combwich [Footnote: p.r.o.nounced _c.u.mmidge_. We here see the disposition in our language to convert _wich_ into _idge_; as _Dulwich_ and _Greenwich_ often p.r.o.nounced by the vulgar _Dullidge, Greenidge_.] to _Cannington_ (three miles from Bridgewater) than another dialect becomes strikingly apparent. Here we have no more of the _zees_, the _hires_, the _veels_, and the _walks_, and a numerous et caetera, which we find in the eastern portion of the county, in the third person singular of the verbs, but instead we have _he zeeth_, he sees, _he veel'th_, he feels, _he walk'th_, he walks, and so on through the whole range of the similar part of every verb. This is of itself a strong and distinguishing characteristic; but this dialect has many more; one is the very different sounds given to almost every word which is employed, and which thus strongly characterize the persons who use them. [Footnote: I cannot pretend to account for this very singular and marked distinction in our western dialects; the fact, however, is so; and it may be added, too, that there can be no doubt both these dialects are the children of our Anglo-Saxon parent.]

Another is that _er_ for he in the nominative case is most commonly employed; thus for, _he said he would not_, is used _Er zad er ood'n--Er ont goor_, for, _he will not go_, &c.

Again _ise_ or _ees_, for I is also common. Many other peculiarities and contractions in this dialect are to a stranger not a little puzzling; and if we proceed so far westward as the confines of Exmoor, they are, to a plain Englishman, very often unintelligible. _Her_ or rather _hare_ is most always used instead of the nominative _she_. _Har'th a dood it_, she has done it; _Hare zad har'd do't._ She said she would do it. This dialect pervades, not only the western portion of Somersetshire, but the whole of Devonshire. As my observations in these papers apply chiefly to the dialect east of the Parret, it is not necessary to proceed further in our present course; yet as _er_ is also occasionally used instead of _he_ in that dialect it becomes useful to point out its different application in the two portions of the county. In the eastern part it is used very rarely if ever in the beginning of sentences; but frequently thus: _A did, did er?_ He did, did he? _Wordn er gwain?_ Was he not going? _Ool er goo?_ will he go?

We may here advert to the common corruption, I suppose I must call it, of _a_ for _he_ used so generally in the west. As _a zed a'd do it_ for, lie said he would do it. Shakespeare has given this form of the p.r.o.noun in the speeches of many of his low characters which, of course, strikingly demonstrates its then very general use among the vulgar; but it is in his works usually printed with a comma thus 'a, to show, probably that it is a corrupt enunciation of he. This comma is, however, very likely an addition by some editor.

Another form of the third personal p.r.o.noun employed only in the objective case is found in the west, namely _en_ for him, as _a zid en_ or, rather more commonly, _a zid'n_, he saw him. Many cases however, occur in which _en_ is fully heard; as _gee't to en_, give it to him. It is remarkable that Congreve, in his comedy of "_Love for Love_" has given to _Ben the Sailor_ in that piece many expressions found in the west. "Thof he be my father I an't bound prentice to en." It should be noted here that _he be_ is rarely if ever heard in the west, but _he's_ or _he is_. _We be, you be_, and _tha be_ are nevertheless very common. _Er_, employed as above, is beyond question aboriginal Saxon; _en_ has been probably adopted as being more euphonious than _him_. [Footnote: I have not met with _en_ for him in any of our more early writers; and I am therefore disposed to consider it as of comparatively modern introduction, and one among the very few changes in language introduced by the _yeomanry_, a cla.s.s of persons less disposed to changes of any kind than any other in society, arising, doubtless, from their isolated position. It must be admitted, nevertheless, that this change if occasionally adopted in our polished dialect would afford an agreeable variety by no means unmusical. In conversation with a very learned Grecian on this subject, he seemed to consider because the _learned_ are constantly, and sometimes very capriciously, introducing _new_ words into our language, that such words as _en_ might be introduced for similar reasons, namely, mere fancy or caprice; on this subject I greatly differ from him: our aboriginal Saxon population has never corrupted our language nor destroyed its energetic character half so much as the mere cla.s.sical scholar. Hence the necessity, in order to a complete knowledge of our mother tongue, that we should study the Anglo-Saxon still found in the provinces.

_Het_ for _it_ is still also common amongst the peasantry. In early Saxon writers, it was usually written _hit_, sometimes _hyt_.

"Als _hit_ in heaven y-doe, Evar in yearth beene it also."

_Metrical Lord's Prayer of_ 1160.

Of _theeaze_, used as a demonstrative p.r.o.noun, both in the singular and plural, for _this_ and _these_, it maybe observed, as well as of the p.r.o.nunciation of many other words in the west, that we have no letters or combination of letters which, express exactly the sounds there given to such words. Theeaze is here marked as a dissyllable, but although it is sometimes decidedly two syllables, its sounds are not always thus apparent in Somerset enunciation. What is more remarkable in this world, is its equal application to the singular and the plural. Thus we say _theeaze man_ and _theaze men_. But in the plural are also employed other forms of the same p.r.o.noun, namely _theeazam, theeazamy_ and _thizzum_. This last word is, of course, decidedly the Anglo-Saxon issum. In the west we say therefore _theeazam here, theeazamy here_, and _thizzam here_ for these, or these here; and sometimes without the pleonastic and unnecessary _here_.

For the demonstrative _those_ of our polished dialect _them_, or _themmy_, and often _them there_ or _themmy there_ are the usual synonyms; as, _gee I themmy there shoes_; that is, give me those shoes. The objective p.r.o.noun _me_, is very sparingly employed indeed--I, in general supplying its place as in the preceding sentence: to this barbarism in the name of my native dialect, I must plead guilty!-- if barbarism our metropolitan critics shall be pleased to term it.

[Footnote: By the way I must just retort upon our polished dialect, that it has gone over to the other extreme in avoidance of the I, using me in many sentences where I ought most decidedly to be employed. It was me [Footnote: I am aware that some of our lexicographers have attempted a defence of this solecism by deriving it from the French c'est moi; but, I think it is from their affected dislike of direct egotism; and that, whenever they can, they avoid the I in order that they might not be thought at once vulgar and egotistic!] is constantly dinned in our ears for it was I: as well as indeed one word more, although not a p.r.o.noun, this is, the almost constant use in London of the verb to lay for the verb to lie, and ketch for catch. If we at head-quarters commit such blunders can we wonder at our provincial detachments falling into similar errors? none certainly more gross than this!]

Thic is in the Somersetshire dialect (namely that to which I have particularly directed my attention and which prevails on the east side of the Parret) invariably employed for that. Thic house, that house; thic man, that man: in the west of the county it is thiky, or thecky. Sometimes thic has the force and meaning of a personal p.r.o.noun, as:

Catch and scrabble Thic that's yable:-- Catch and scramble He who's able.

Again, thic that dont like it mid leave it,--he who does not like it may leave it. It should be noted that th in all the p.r.o.nouns above mentioned has the obtuse sound as heard in then and this and not the thin sound as heard in both, thin, and many other words of our polished dialect. Chaucer employed the p.r.o.noun thic very often, but he spells it thilk; he does not appear, however, to have always restricted it to the meaning implied in our that and to the present Somerset thic. Spenser has also employed thilk in his Shepherd's Calendar several times.

"Seest not thilk same hawthorn stud How bragly it begins to bud And utter his tender head?" "Our blonket leveries been all too sad For thilk same season, when all is yclad With pleasance."

I cannot conclude without a few observations on three very remarkable Somersetshire words, namely twordn, wordn, and zino.

They are living evidences of the contractions with which that dialect very much abounds.

Twordn means it was not; and is composed of three words, namely it, wor, and not; wor is the past tense, or, as it is sometimes called, the preterite of the verb to be, in the third person singular; [Footnote: It should be observed here that was is rather uncommon among the Somersetshire peasantry--wor, or war, being there the synonyms; thus Spenser in his 'Shepherd's Calendar.'"

"The kid,-- Asked the cause of his great distress, And also who and whence that he wer You say he was there, and I say that _a wordn_; You say that 'twas he, and I tell you that _twordn_; You ask, will he go? I reply, not as I know; You say _that_ he _will_, and _I_must _say, no, Zino_!]

and such is the indistinctness with which the sound of the vowel in were is commonly expressed in Somersetshire, that wor, wer, or war, will nearly alike convey it, the sound of the e being rarely if ever long; twordn is therefore composed, as stated, of three words; but it will be asked what business has the _d_ in it? To this it may be replied that _d_ and _t_ are, as is well known, often converted in our language the one into the other; but by far the most frequently _d_ is converted into _t_. Here, however, the _t_ is not only converted into _d_, but instead of being placed after _n_, as a.n.a.logy requires thus, _twornt_, it is placed before it for _euphony_ I dare say. Such is the a.n.a.lysis of this singular and, if not euphonious, most certainly expressive word.

_Wordn_ admits of a similar explanation; but this word is composed of two words only, _war_ and _not_; instead of _wornt_, which a.n.a.logy requires, a _d_ is placed before _n_ for a similar reason that the _d_ is placed before _n_ in _twordn_, namely for euphony; _wordn_ is decidedly another of the forcible words.

_Wordn fir gwain_?--was he not going, may compete with any language for its energetic brevity.

_Zino_, has the force and application of an interjection, and has sufficient of the _ore rotundo_ to appear a cla.s.sical dissyllable; its origin is, however, simply the contract of, _as I know_, and it is usually preceeded in Somersetshire by _no_. Thus, _ool er do it_? _no, zino_! _I thawt a oodn_. Will he do it? no, as I know! I thought he would not.

These words, _Twordn_, _Wordn_, and _Zino_, may be thus exemplified:

CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS.

I cannot, perhaps, better close this work, than by presenting to the reader the observations of Miss HAM, (a Somersetshire lady of no mean talents), in a letter to me on these dialects.

The lines, of which I desired a copy, contain an exemplification of the use of _utchy_ or _iche_, used contractedly [see UTCHY in the _Glossary_] by the inhabitants of the _South_ of Somersetshire, one of the strongholds, as I conceive, of the Anglo-Saxon dialect.

In our polished dialect, the lines quoted by Miss HAM, may be thus rendered--

Bread and cheese I have had, What I had I have eaten, More I would [have eaten if] I had [had] it.

If the contradictions be supplied they will stand thus:--

Bread and cheese _iche_ have a had That _iche_ had _iche_ have a eat More _iche_ would _iche_ had it.

CLIFTON, _Jan._ 30, 1825

Sir:

I have certainly great pleasure in complying with your request, although I fear that any communication it is in my power to make, will be of little use to you in your curious work on the West Country dialect. The lines you desire are these:

Bread and cheese 'e' have a had, That 'e' had 'e' have a eat, More 'ch wou'd 'e' had it.

Sounds which, from a.s.sociation no doubt, carry with them to my ear the idea of great vulgarity: but which might have a very different effect on that of an unprejudiced hearer, when dignified by an Anglo-Saxon pedigree. The Scotch dialect, now become _quite cla.s.sical_ with us, might, perhaps, labour under the same disadvantage amongst those who hear it spoken by the vulgar only.

Although I am a native of Somersetshire, I have resided very little in that county since my childhood, and, in my occasional visits since, have had little intercourse with the _aborigines_. I recollect, however, two or three words, which you might not, perhaps, have met with. One of them of which I have traditionary knowledge, being, I believe, now quite obsolete.

_Pitisanquint_ was used in reply to an inquiry after the health of a person, and was, I understand, equivalent to _pretty well_, or _so so_. The word _Lamiger_, which signifies an invalid, I have no doubt you have met with. When any one forbodes bad weather, or any disaster, it is very common to say _Don't ye housenee_. Here you have the verbal termination, which you remarked was so common in the West, and which I cannot help thinking might have been originally vised as a sort of diminutive, and that _to milkee_, signified to milk _a little_.