A thought from my friend Paul of Diabolus in Musica who knows a lot About
early English, and even speaks it when required
Nick

Dear Nick,

I think these are simple plurals. They're just idiomatic - probably drawn 
from a dialect usage. I'm sure there are a number of modern dialects (eg. 
Cockney, Gloucester) where "tears kills the heart" would be the normal 
form - probably with a dropped h in "heart", which was also common among the

higher orders of society in the Elizabethan period. There were no 
standardised and codified rules of grammar in that period - at least, none 
that met with anything like universal acceptance. Ralegh spoke broad Devon 
at court, and wasn't mocked for it. If you wanted to establish your 
linguistic rank, you did it in French or Latin.

Best wishes,

Paul

-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Durbrow [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 17 March 2006 10:30
To: LGS-Europe; lute list
Subject: [LUTE] Re: I saw my lady weep

We are talking about 400 year old English here. It is difficult for  
many native speakers. The lute songs are not just normal English but  
sometimes very deep. The syntax often blows my mind, - very hard to  
hang on to sometimes. I wouldn't worry at all about such a detail. If  
you can understand it, you are ahead of the game. I heard that  
Shakespeare spelled his name 17 different ways or something like that!

I am not an expert, maybe someone else has deep thoughts.

cheers,

On Mar 17, 2006, at 6:20 AM, LGS-Europe wrote:

> third verse:
>
> ..joyful looks excells.
> Tears kills the heart...
>
> What's with the s-es after the verbs? 'Looks' and 'tears' (noun,  
> for sure in
> the contaxt) are plural, so I would expect 'excell' and 'kill'.
> Someone told me these could 'abstract nouns' and have singelur  
> verb. I can
> imagine something like that with the 'teares'. They are not just  
> the salty
> drops
> coming from the eyes, but are an abstract image of sadness, and as  
> such
> singular. But with the 'looks' it doesn't quite feel natural. Just  
> early
> spelling, or sloppiness thereof? But an 's' behind both verbs...
> Any deep thoughts out there? I wish Bob Spencer was still around to  
> ask.
> Sigh.
>
> David
>
>
>
> ************************************
> David van Ooijen
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Http://www.davidvanooijen.nl
> ************************************
>
>
>
>
>
> To get on or off this list see list information at
> http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html

Ed Durbrow
Saitama, Japan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www9.plala.or.jp/edurbrow/







Reply via email to