Hubbry Logo
Early Modern EnglishEarly Modern EnglishMain
Open search
Early Modern English
Community hub
Early Modern English
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Early Modern English
Early Modern English
Early Modern English
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Early Modern English
Shakespeare's English, Shakespearean English, King James' English
English
William Shakespeare's Sonnet 132 in the 1609 Quarto
Native toEngland, Wales, Scotland, Ireland and English overseas possessions
EraEarly modern period; developed into Modern English in the late 17th century
Early forms
Language codes
ISO 639-3–
ISO 639-6emen
GlottologNone
IETFen-emodeng
This article contains IPA phonetic symbols. Without proper rendering support, you may see question marks, boxes, or other symbols instead of Unicode characters. For an introductory guide on IPA symbols, see Help:IPA.

Early Modern English (sometimes abbreviated EModE[1] or EMnE), also known as Early New English (ENE), and colloquially Shakespeare's English, Shakespearean English, or King James' English, is the stage of the English language from the beginning of the Tudor period to the English Interregnum and Restoration, or from the transition from Middle English, in the late 15th century, to the transition to Modern English, in the mid-to-late 17th century.[2] Early Modern English was spoken with Original Pronunciation.

Before and after the accession of James I to the English throne in 1603, the emerging English standard began to influence the spoken and written Middle Scots of Scotland.

The grammatical and orthographical conventions of literary English in the late 16th century and the 17th century are still very influential on modern Standard English. Most modern readers of English can understand texts written in the late phase of Early Modern English, such as the King James Bible and the works of William Shakespeare, and they have greatly influenced Modern English.

Texts from the earlier phase of Early Modern English, such as the late-15th-century Le Morte d'Arthur (1485) and the mid-16th-century Gorboduc (1561), may present more difficulties but are still closer to Modern English grammar, lexicon and phonology than are 14th-century Middle English texts, such as the works of Geoffrey Chaucer.

King James Version of Psalm 23

History

[edit]

English Renaissance

[edit]
See also: English Renaissance

Transition from Middle English

[edit]
Further information: Late Middle English

The change from Middle English to Early Modern English affected much more than just vocabulary and pronunciation.[1]

Middle English underwent significant change over time and contained large dialectical variations. Early Modern English, on the other hand, became more standardised and developed an established canon of literature that survives today.

  • 1476 – William Caxton started printing in Westminster; however, the language that he used reflected the variety of styles and dialects used by the authors who originally wrote the material.
Tudor period (1485–1603)
[edit]
  • 1485 – Caxton published Thomas Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur, the first print bestseller in English. Malory's language, while archaic in some respects, was clearly Early Modern and was possibly a Yorkshire or Midlands dialect.
  • 1491 or 1492 – Richard Pynson started printing in London; his style tended to prefer Chancery Standard, the form of English used by the government.

Henry VIII

[edit]
  • c. 1509 – Pynson became the king's official printer.
  • From 1525 – Publication of William Tyndale's Bible translation, which was initially banned.
  • 1539 – Publication of the Great Bible, the first officially authorised Bible in English. Edited by Myles Coverdale, it was largely from the work of Tyndale. It was read to congregations regularly in churches, which familiarised much of the population of England with a standard form of the language.
  • 1549 – Publication of the first edition of the Book of Common Prayer in English, under the supervision of Thomas Cranmer (revised in 1552, 1559, 1604, and 1662), which standardised much of the wording of church services. Some have argued that since attendance at prayer book services was required by law for many years, the repetitive use of its language helped to standardise Modern English even more than the King James Bible (1611) did.[3]
  • 1557 – Publication of Tottel's Miscellany.

Elizabethan English

[edit]
Title page of Gorboduc (printed 1565). The Tragedie of Gorbodvc, whereof three Actes were wrytten by Thomas Nortone, and the two laste by Thomas Sackuyle. Sett forthe as the same was shewed before the Qvenes most excellent Maiestie, in her highnes Court of Whitehall, the .xviii. day of January, Anno Domini .1561. By the Gentlemen of Thynner Temple in London.
Elizabethan era (1558–1603)
  • 1560 – The Geneva Bible was published. The New Testament was completed in 1557 by English Reformed exiles on the continent during the reign of Mary, and the complete Bible three years later, after Elizabeth succeeded the throne. This version was favoured by the Puritans and Pilgrims due to its more vigorous and forceful language. Its popularity and proliferation (due in large part to its copious notes) over the following decades sparked the production of the King James Bible to counter it.
  • 1582 – The Rheims and Douai Bible was completed, and the New Testament was released in Rheims, France, in 1582. It was the first complete English translation of the Bible that was officially sponsored and carried out by the Catholic Church (earlier translations into English, especially of the Psalms and Gospels, existed as far back as the 9th century, but it was the first Catholic English translation of the full Bible). Though the Old Testament was already complete, it was not published until 1609–1610, when it was released in two volumes. While it did not make a large impact on the English language at large, it certainly played a role in the development of English, especially in heavily Catholic English-speaking areas.
  • Christopher Marlowe, fl. 1586–1593
  • 1592 – The Spanish Tragedy by Thomas Kyd
  • c. 1590 – c. 1612 – Shakespeare's plays written
    See also: Chronology of Shakespeare's plays and Shakespeare's influence
Further information: Elizabethan literature and English Renaissance theatre

17th century

[edit]

Jacobean and Caroline eras

[edit]
Jacobean era (1603–1625)
[edit]
Further information: Jacobean era
Caroline era and English Civil War (1625–1649)
[edit]
Further information: Caroline era and English Civil War

Interregnum and Restoration

[edit]

The English Civil War and the Interregnum were times of social and political upheaval and instability. The dates for Restoration literature are a matter of convention and differ markedly from genre to genre. In drama, the "Restoration" may last until 1700, but in poetry, it may last only until 1666, the annus mirabilis (year of wonders), and in prose lasts until 1688. With the increasing tensions over succession and the corresponding rise in journalism and periodicals, or until possibly 1700, when those periodicals grew more stabilised.

Development to Modern English

[edit]
Main article: Modern English

The 17th-century port towns and their forms of speech gained influence over the old county towns. From around the 1690s onwards, England experienced a new period of internal peace and relative stability, which encouraged the arts including literature.

Modern English can be taken to have emerged fully by the beginning of the Georgian era in 1714, but English orthography remained somewhat fluid until the publication of Johnson's A Dictionary of the English Language, in 1755.

The Proceedings in Courts of Justice Act 1730 made English, instead of Law French and Latin, the obligatory language for use in the courts of England and in the court of exchequer in Scotland. It was later extended to Wales, and seven years later a similar act was passed in Ireland, the Administration of Justice (Language) Act (Ireland) 1737.[4]

The towering importance of William Shakespeare over the other Elizabethan authors was the result of his reception during the 17th and the 18th centuries, which directly contributes to the development of Standard English.[citation needed] Shakespeare's plays are therefore still familiar and comprehensible 400 years after they were written,[5] but the works of Geoffrey Chaucer and William Langland, which had been written only 200 years earlier, are considerably more difficult for the average modern reader.

Orthography

[edit]
Shakespeare's writings are universally associated with Early Modern English.

The orthography of Early Modern English is recognisably similar to that of today, but spelling was unstable. Early Modern and Modern English both retain various orthographical conventions that predate the Great Vowel Shift.

Early Modern English spelling was broadly similar to that encountered in Middle English. Some of the changes that occurred were based on etymology (as with the silent ⟨b⟩ that was added to words like debt, doubt and subtle). Many spellings had still not been standardised. For example, he was spelled as both he and hee in the same sentence in Shakespeare's plays and elsewhere.

Certain key orthographic features of Early Modern English spelling have not been retained:

  • The letter ⟨S⟩ had two distinct lowercase forms: ⟨s⟩ (short s), as is still used today, and ⟨ſ⟩ (long s). The short s was always used at the end of a word and often elsewhere. The long s, if used, could appear anywhere except at the end of a word. The double lowercase S was written variously ⟨ſſ⟩, ⟨ſs⟩ or ⟨ß⟩ (the last ligature is still used in German ß).[6] That is similar to the alternation between medial (σ) and final lowercase sigma (ς) in Greek.
  • ⟨u⟩ and ⟨v⟩ were not considered two distinct letters then but as still different forms of the same letter. Typographically, ⟨v⟩ was frequent at the start of a word and ⟨u⟩ elsewhere:[7] hence vnmoued (for modern unmoved) and loue (for love). The modern convention of using ⟨u⟩ for the vowel sounds and ⟨v⟩ for the consonant appears to have been introduced in the 1630s.[8] Also, ⟨w⟩ was frequently represented by ⟨vv⟩.
  • Similarly, ⟨i⟩ and ⟨j⟩ were also still considered not as two distinct letters, but as different forms of the same letter: hence ioy for joy and iust for just. Again, the custom of using ⟨i⟩ as a vowel and ⟨j⟩ as a consonant began in the 1630s.[8]
  • The letter ⟨þ⟩ (thorn) was still in use during the Early Modern English period but was increasingly limited to handwritten texts. In Early Modern English printing, ⟨þ⟩ was represented by the Latin ⟨Y⟩ (see Ye olde), which appeared similar to thorn in blackletter typeface ⟨𝖞⟩. Thorn had become nearly totally disused by the late Early Modern English period, the last vestiges of the letter being its ligatures, ye (thee), yt (that), yu (thou), which were still seen occasionally in the 1611 King James Version and in Shakespeare's Folios.[9]
  • A silent ⟨e⟩ was often appended to words, as in ſpeake and cowarde. The last consonant was sometimes doubled when the ⟨e⟩ was added: hence manne (for man) and runne (for run).
  • The sound /ʌ/ was often written ⟨o⟩ (as in son): hence ſommer, plombe (for modern summer, plumb).[10]
  • The final syllable of words like public was variously spelt but came to be standardised as -ick. The modern spellings with -ic did not come into use until the mid-18th century.[11]
  • ⟨y⟩ was often used instead of ⟨i⟩.[12]
  • The vowels represented by ⟨ee⟩ and ⟨e_e⟩ (for example in meet and mete) changed, and ⟨ea⟩ became an alternative.[12]

Phonology

[edit]
[]
This section contains IPA phonetic symbols. Without proper rendering support, you may see question marks, boxes, or other symbols instead of Unicode characters. For an introductory guide on IPA symbols, see Help:IPA.

Early Modern English phonology has been reconstructed as Original Pronunciation (OP), primarily for productions of Shakespeare in Original Pronunciation.[13][14]

Consonants

[edit]
Early Modern English consonants
Labial Dental Alveolar Postalveolar Palatal Velar Glottal
Nasal m n ŋ
Stop p • b t • d tʃ • dʒ k • ɡ
Fricative f • v θ • ð s • z ʃ • ʒ (ç) x h
Approximant r j ʍ • w
Lateral l

Most consonant sounds of Early Modern English have survived into present-day English; however, there are still a few notable differences in pronunciation:

  • Today's "silent" consonants found in the consonant clusters of such words as knot, gnat, sword were still fully pronounced up until the mid-to-late 16th century and thus possibly by Shakespeare, though they were fully reduced by the early 17th century.[15]
  • The digraph ⟨gh⟩, in words like night, thought and daughter, originally pronounced [x] in much older English, was probably reduced to nothing (as it is today) or at least heavily reduced in sound to something like [ht], [ç], [h], or [f]. It seems likely that much variation existed for many of these words. Upon its disappearance, it lengthened the previous vowel.[citation needed]
  • The now-silent l of would and should may have persisted in being pronounced as late as 1700 in Britain and perhaps several decades longer in the British American colonies.[16] The l in could, however, first appearing in the early 16th century, was presumably never pronounced.
  • The modern phoneme /ʒ/ was not documented as occurring until the second half of the 17th century. Likely, that phoneme in a word like vision was pronounced as /zj/ and in measure as /z/.
  • Most words with the spelling ⟨wh⟩, such as what, where and whale, were still pronounced [ʍ] ⓘ, rather than [w] ⓘ. That means, for example, that wine and whine were still pronounced differently, unlike in most varieties of English today.[17]
  • Early Modern English was rhotic. In other words, the r was always pronounced,[17] but the precise nature of the typical rhotic consonant remains unclear. [citation needed] It was, however, certainly one of the following:
    • The "R" of most varieties of English today: [ɹ̠] ⓘ or a further forward sound [ɹ] ⓘ
    • The "trilled or rolled R": [r] ⓘ, perhaps with one contact [ɾ] ⓘ, as in modern Scouse and Scottish English
    • The "retroflex R": [ɻ] ⓘ.
  • In Early Modern English, the precise nature of the light and dark variants of the l consonant, respectively [l] ⓘ and [ɫ] ⓘ, remains unclear.
  • Word-final ⟨ng⟩, as in sing, was still pronounced [ŋɡ] until the late 16th century, when it began to coalesce into the usual modern pronunciation, [ŋ]. The original pronunciation [ŋɡ] is preserved in parts of England, in dialects such as Brummie, Mancunian and Scouse.
  • H-dropping at the start of words was common, as it still is in informal English throughout most of England.[17] In loanwords taken from Latin, Greek, or any Romance language, a written h was usually mute well into modern English times, e.g. in heritage, history, hermit, hostage, and still today in heir, honor, hour etc.
  • With words originating from or passed through ancient Greek, th was commonly pronounced as t, e.g. theme, theater, cathedral, anthem; this is still retained in some proper names as Thomas and a few common nouns like thyme.[citation needed]

Vowels

[edit]
Early modern English vowels
Monophthongs Diphthongs
Short Long +/j/ +/w/
Close Front ɪ iː ɪw
Back ʊ uː
Close-mid Front eː
Back oː
Mid ə əj əw
Open-mid Front ɛ ɛj
Back ɤ ɔː ɔj ɔw
Near-open Front
Back ɒ
Open a aː

The following information primarily comes from studies of the Great Vowel Shift;[18][19] see the related chart.

  • The modern English phoneme /aɪ/ ⓘ, as in glide, rhyme and eye, was [əi], and was reduced word-finally. Early Modern rhymes indicate that [əi] was similar to the vowel that was used at the end of words like happy, melody and busy.
  • /aʊ/ ⓘ, as in now, out and ploughed, was [əu] ⓘ.
  • /ɛ/ ⓘ, as in fed, elm and hen, was more or less the same as the phoneme represents today, sometimes approaching [ɪ] ⓘ (which is still in the word pretty).[17]
  • /eɪ/ ⓘ, as in name, case and sake, was a long monophthong. It shifted from [æː] ⓘ to [ɛː] ⓘ and finally to [eː] ⓘ. Earlier in Early Modern English, mat and mate were near-homophones, with a longer vowel in the second word. Thus, Shakespeare rhymed words like haste, taste and waste with last and shade with sad.[20] The more open pronunciation remains in some Northern England English and rarely in Irish English. During the 17th century, the phoneme variably merged with the phoneme [ɛi] ⓘ as in day, weigh, and the merger survived into standard forms of Modern English, though a few dialects kept these vowels distinct at least to the 20th century (see pane–pain merger).
  • /iː/ ⓘ (typically spelled ⟨ee⟩ or ⟨ie⟩) as in see, bee and meet, was more or less the same as the phoneme represents today, but it had not yet merged with the phoneme represented by the spellings ⟨ea⟩ or ⟨ei⟩ (and perhaps ⟨ie⟩, particularly with fiend, field and friend), as in east, meal and feat, which were pronounced with [eː] ⓘ or [ɛ̝ː].[21][20] However, words like breath, dead and head may have already split off towards /ɛ/ ⓘ).
  • /ɪ/ ⓘ, as in bib, pin and thick, was more or less the same as the phoneme represents today.
  • /oʊ/ ⓘ, as in stone, bode and yolk, was [oː] ⓘ or [o̞ː] ⓘ. The phoneme was probably just beginning the process of merging with the phoneme [ow], as in grow, know and mow, without yet achieving today's complete merger. The old pronunciation remains in some dialects, such as in Yorkshire, East Anglia, and Scotland.
  • /ɒ/ ⓘ, as in rod, top and pot, was [ɒ] or [ɔ] ⓘ, much like the corresponding RP sound.
  • /ɔː/ ⓘ, as in taut, taught and law was more open than in contemporary RP, being [ɔː] or [ɑː] ⓘ (and thus being closer to Welsh and General American /ɔː/)
  • /ɔɪ/ ⓘ, as in boy, choice and toy, is even less clear than other vowels. In the late 16th century, the similar but distinct phonemes /ɔi/, /ʊi/ and /əi/ all existed. By the late 17th century, they all merged.[22] Because those phonemes were in such a state of flux during the whole Early Modern period (with evidence of rhyming occurring among them as well as with the precursor to /aɪ/), scholars[15] often assume only the most neutral possibility for the pronunciation of /ɔɪ/ as well as its similar phonemes in Early Modern English: [əɪ] (which, if accurate, would constitute an early instance of the line–loin merger since /aɪ/ had not yet fully developed in English).
  • /ʌ/ ⓘ (as in drum, enough and love) and /ʊ/ ⓘ (as in could, full, put) had not yet split and so were both pronounced in the vicinity of [ʊ] ⓘ.
  • /uː/ ⓘ occurred not only in words like food, moon and stool, but also all other words spelled with ⟨oo⟩ like blood, cook and foot. However, the vowel for some of those words was shortened at an early stage: either beginning or already in the process of approximating the Early Modern English [ʊ] ⓘ. That phonological split among the ⟨oo⟩ words was a catalyst for the later foot–strut split and is called "early shortening" by John C. Wells.[23] The ⟨oo⟩ words that came to be pronounced with the shortened vowel [ʊ] ⓘ included, for example, good and blood. They, like other words with /ʊ/, were subsequently subject to the foot–strut split and many of them, like drum and love, came to be pronounced with the vowel [ɤ] ⓘ and eventually /ʌ/ ⓘ. However, the words with a shortened vowel also seem to have included, at least in some pronunciations such as Shakespeare's and at certain stages, some words that are pronounced with the original non-shortened vowel /uː/ ⓘ in Present-Day English - e.g. brood, doom and noon. For example, doom and come rhyme in Shakespeare's writing for this reason.[24]
  • /ɪw/ or /iw/[25] occurred in words spelled with ew or ue such as due and dew. In most dialects of Modern English, it became /juː/ and /uː/ by yod-dropping and so do, dew and due are now perfect homophones in most American pronunciations, but a distinction between the two phonemes remains in other versions of English. There is, however, an additional complication in dialects with yod-coalescence (such as Australian English and younger RP), in which dew and due /dʒuː/ (homophonous with jew) are distinguished from do /duː/ purely by the initial consonant, without any vowel distinction.

The difference between the transcription of the EME diphthong offsets with ⟨j w⟩, as opposed to the usual modern English transcription with ⟨ɪ̯ ʊ̯⟩ is not meaningful in any way. The precise EME realizations are not known, and they vary even in modern English.

Rhoticity

[edit]

The r sound (the phoneme /r/) was probably always pronounced following vowel sounds, as in modern General American, West Country English, Irish English, and Scottish English.

At the beginning of the Early Modern English period there were three non-open and non-schwa short vowels before /r/ in the syllable coda: /e/, /i/ and /u/ (roughly equivalent to modern /ɛ/, /ɪ/ and /ʊ/; /ʌ/ had not yet developed). In London English they gradually merged into a phoneme that became modern /ɜːr/, known as the NURSE mergers. While ⟨ur⟩ spellings for ⟨ir⟩ words exist in the 1500s, these are descended from Old English words with the segments /yr/ and /ri/ suggesting that they may not be part of the merger. The earliest native speaker to comment on mergers between the classes is John Wallis in 1653, showing a near merger of /ur/ and /ir/, with "turn" and "burn" having the vowel of "dull", and "virtue" with a slightly closer or unrounded vowel. However, a smaller number of speakers merge /ir/ and /er/ instead. The full three-way NURSE mergers only completed in England around 1800.[26]

Specific words

[edit]

Nature was pronounced approximately as [ˈnɛːtəɹ][17] and may have rhymed with letter or, early on, even latter. One may have been pronounced own, with both one and other using the era's long GOAT vowel, rather than today's STRUT vowels.[17] Tongue derived from the sound of tong and rhymed with song.[20]

Grammar

[edit]

Pronouns

[edit]

Early Modern English had two second-person personal pronouns: thou, the informal singular pronoun, and ye, the plural (both formal and informal) pronoun and the formal singular pronoun.

"Thou" and "ye" were both common in the early 16th century (they can be seen, for example, in the disputes over Tyndale's translation of the Bible in the 1520s and the 1530s) but by 1650, "thou" seems old-fashioned or literary. It has effectively completely disappeared from Modern Standard English.

The translators of the King James Version of the Bible (begun 1604 and published 1611, while Shakespeare was at the height of his popularity) had a particular reason for keeping the informal "thou/thee/thy/thine/thyself" forms that were slowly beginning to fall out of spoken use, as it enabled them to match the Hebrew and Ancient Greek distinction between second person singular ("thou") and plural ("ye"). It was not to denote reverence (in the King James Version, God addresses individual people and even Satan as "thou") but only to denote the singular. Over the centuries, however, the very fact that "thou" was dropping out of normal use gave it a special aura and so it gradually and ironically came to be used to express reverence in hymns and in prayers.[citation needed]

Like other personal pronouns, thou and ye have different forms dependent on their grammatical case; specifically, the objective form of thou is thee, its possessive forms are thy and thine, and its reflexive or emphatic form is thyself.

The objective form of ye was you, its possessive forms are your and yours and its reflexive or emphatic forms are yourself and yourselves.

The older forms "mine" and "thine" had become "my" and "thy" before words beginning with a consonant other than h, and "mine" and "thine" were retained before words beginning with a vowel or an h, as in mine eyes or thine hand.

Personal pronouns in Early Modern English
Nominative Oblique Genitive Possessive
1st person singular I me my/mine[# 1] mine
plural we us our ours
2nd person singular informal thou thee thy/thine[# 1] thine
plural informal ye (you)[# 2] you your yours
formal
3rd person singular he/she/it him/her/it his/her/his (it)[# 3] his/hers/his[# 3]
plural they them their theirs
  1. ^ a b The genitives my, mine, thy, and thine are used as possessive adjectives before a noun, or as possessive pronouns without a noun. All four forms are used as possessive adjectives: mine and thine are used before nouns beginning in a vowel sound, or before nouns beginning in the letter h, which was usually silent (e.g. thine eyes and mine heart, which was pronounced as mine art) and my and thy before consonants (thy mother, my love). However, only mine and thine are used as possessive pronouns, as in it is thine and they were mine (not *they were my).
  2. ^ Ye had fallen out of use by c. 1600, being replaced by the original oblique you.
  3. ^ a b From the early Early Modern English period up until the 17th century, his was the possessive of the third-person neuter it as well as of the third-person masculine he. Genitive it appears once in the 1611 King James Bible (Leviticus 25:5) as groweth of it owne accord.

Verbs

[edit]

Tense and number

[edit]

During the Early Modern period, the verb inflections became simplified as they evolved towards their modern forms:

  • The third-person singular present lost its alternate inflections: -eth and -th became obsolete, and -s survived. (Both forms can be seen together in Shakespeare: "With her, that hateth thee and hates us all".)[27]
  • The plural present form became uninflected. Present plurals had been marked with -en and singulars with -th or -s (-th and -s survived the longest, especially with the singular use of is, hath and doth).[28] Marked present plurals were rare throughout the Early Modern period and -en was probably used only as a stylistic affectation to indicate rural or old-fashioned speech.[29]
  • The second-person singular indicative was marked in both the present and past tenses with -st or -est (for example, in the past tense, walkedst or gav'st).[30] Since the indicative past was not and still is not otherwise marked for person or number,[31] the loss of thou made the past subjunctive indistinguishable from the indicative past for all verbs except to be.
[edit]

The modal auxiliaries cemented their distinctive syntactical characteristics during the Early Modern period. Thus, the use of modals without an infinitive became rare (as in "I must to Coventry"; "I'll none of that"). The use of modals' present participles to indicate aspect (as in "Maeyinge suffer no more the loue & deathe of Aurelio" from 1556), and of their preterite forms to indicate tense (as in "he follow'd Horace so very close, that of necessity he must fall with him") also became uncommon.[32]

Some verbs ceased to function as modals during the Early Modern period. The present form of must, mot, became obsolete. Dare also lost the syntactical characteristics of a modal auxiliary and evolved a new past form (dared), distinct from the modal durst.[33]

Perfect and progressive forms

[edit]

The perfect of the verbs had not yet been standardised to use only the auxiliary verb "to have". Some took as their auxiliary verb "to be", such as this example from the King James Version: "But which of you... will say unto him... when he is come from the field, Go and sit down..." [Luke XVII:7]. The rules for the auxiliaries for different verbs were similar to those that are still observed in German and French (see unaccusative verb).

The modern syntax used for the progressive aspect ("I am walking") became dominant by the end of the Early Modern period, but other forms were also common such as the prefix a- ("I am a-walking") and the infinitive paired with "do" ("I do walk"). Moreover, the to be + -ing verb form could be used to express a passive meaning without any additional markers: "The house is building" could mean "The house is being built".[34]

Vocabulary

[edit]

A number of words that are still in common use in Modern English have undergone semantic narrowing.

The use of the verb "to suffer" in the sense of "to allow" survived into Early Modern English, as in the phrase "suffer the little children" of the King James Version, but it has mostly been lost in Modern English.[35] This use still exists in the idiom "to suffer fools gladly".

Also, this period includes one of the earliest Russian borrowings to English (which is historically a rare occasion itself[36]); at least as early as 1600, the word "steppe" (rus. степь[37]) first appeared in English in William Shakespeare's comedy A Midsummer Night's Dream. It is believed that this is a possible indirect borrowing via either German or French.

The substantial borrowing of Latin and sometimes Greek words for abstract concepts, begun in Middle English, continued unabated, often terms for abstract concepts not available in English.[38]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Early Modern English

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Early Modern English (EME) is the stage of the used from approximately 1500 to 1800, marking a pivotal transition from to the modern form through profound phonological, morphological, syntactic, and lexical developments. This period, often dated from the late with the Renaissance's onset, witnessed the , a systematic chain of pronunciation changes that raised and diphthongized long vowels, fundamentally altering how words like time (from /iː/ to /aɪ/) and house (from /uː/ to /aʊ/) were spoken and creating a lasting divide between English spelling and . The introduction of the by in 1476 accelerated standardization, promoting consistent spelling and grammar based on the London dialect while disseminating literature and religious texts, which helped unify the language amid regional variations. External influences, including the revival of classical learning, flooded English with Latin and Greek loanwords—known as "inkhorn terms" like education and philosophy—expanding vocabulary by thousands of words to accommodate scientific, artistic, and scholarly discourse. The Protestant Reformation further shaped EME by translating the into vernacular English, such as the King James Version of 1611, which influenced and phrasing in everyday use. Morphologically, inflections simplified, with pronouns retaining some older forms (e.g., and ye) and the rise of periphrastic constructions like in questions and negatives, while solidified the subject-verb-object order. Colonial expansion during this era introduced borrowings from languages encountered in the , , and , enriching lexicon with terms like and . Iconic figures like exemplified EME's flexibility and inventiveness, coining or popularizing over 1,700 words and phrases in works such as (c. 1600), which blend poetic innovation with emerging modern structures. By , these cumulative changes had positioned English for its global dominance, though remnants of EME pronunciation and persist in contemporary usage.

Historical Development

Transition from

The transition from to Early Modern English occurred toward the end of the fifteenth century, marking a shift from a period of regional dialects and French influence to a more standardized form driven by national unification and technological advancements. This era began around 1500, coinciding with the Tudor dynasty's rise in 1485, when English gained prominence in political, legal, and literary domains over Latin and French. The introduction of the by in 1476 played a pivotal role, enabling widespread dissemination of texts and promoting a London-based dialect as the prestige variety. Caxton's press in Westminster produced over 100 works, including translations and originals, which helped consolidate spelling and across regions. Phonologically, the (GVS) was the most transformative change, occurring primarily between the late fourteenth and sixteenth centuries, though its effects extended into the seventeenth. This raised and diphthongized long vowels—such as Middle English /iː/ becoming /aɪ/ (e.g., "bite" from /biːtə/) and /uː/ to /aʊ/ (e.g., "house" from /huːs/)—altering the sound system to resemble modern English pronunciation while creating a mismatch with inherited spellings. The GVS progressed from northward, with variations like the Northern Shift affecting Scots differently, and was influenced by social factors such as and migration. Consonant changes were less dramatic but included the fricativization of /x/ to /h/ or its disappearance (e.g., "night" from /nixt/). Grammatically, Early Modern English simplified the inflectional system inherited from , reducing case endings on nouns and adjectives while retaining some variability. Nouns largely lost gender distinctions and plural forms standardized to -s (from varied endings like -en), and adjectives dropped most inflections except for a genitive -s in some uses. Verb conjugations saw the decline of the subjunctive in favor of indicative forms and the emergence of in questions and negations, though these were not fully regularized until later. Pronouns stabilized, with "you" supplanting "thou" in polite address by the seventeenth century, reflecting social leveling. Vocabulary expanded dramatically due to the and global exploration, incorporating thousands of Latin and Greek roots (e.g., "" from Latin educare) alongside loanwords from trade languages like Italian and Spanish. Inkhorn terms, scholarly neologisms, sparked debates on , but many endured, enriching the for scientific and artistic expression. Orthographically, fostered consistency, though Early Modern remained fluid—e.g., "love" variably as "luf" or "luve"—before dictionaries like Johnson's in 1755 further standardized it. These developments collectively transformed English into a more accessible, versatile language suited to the emerging modern world.

Tudor Era (1485–1603)

The Tudor era (1485–1603) initiated the Early Modern English period, bridging the transition from through profound influences from the , religious , and technological advancements in . This time saw the consolidation of a more unified English , driven by increased and the dissemination of texts that promoted a London-based as a prestige form. Key figures like , who established England's first in 1476 just prior to the era's start, continued to shape the by producing works that favored southern English forms, such as his 1485 edition of Thomas Malory's Le Morte d'Arthur, which exemplified emerging printed standards. The press enabled mass reproduction of texts, reducing regional variations and fostering a sense of linguistic consistency, though full remained elusive until later centuries. Phonological changes were prominent, with the gaining momentum in the late 15th and 16th centuries, systematically altering long vowel pronunciations across . High vowels like /iː/ (as in time) diphthongized to /aɪ/, and mid vowels raised, such as /eː/ (as in see) becoming /iː/, transforming words like house from /huːs/ to /haʊs/ by the era's end. This shift, ongoing from but accelerating under Tudor influences like and , created a disconnect between (frozen by ) and spoken forms, evident in contemporary rhymes from poets like . Northern dialects resisted some changes, preserving older vowel qualities and contributing to grammatical innovations that spread southward. Vocabulary expanded dramatically due to and the , incorporating thousands of loanwords from Latin, Greek, and classical sources to express new concepts in science, , and . Known as "inkhorn terms," borrowings like anatomy, artificial, and entered via scholars such as in his 1531 The Boke Named the Governour, enriching the lexicon but sparking debates over "pure" English versus foreign imports. The era's religious upheavals further propelled semantic shifts; William Tyndale's 1526 translation introduced accessible phrasing that influenced subsequent Bibles, coining or popularizing expressions like "" and words such as , embedding them into everyday English and promoting a more direct, idiomatic style. Grammatical structures began modernizing, with the third-person singular verb ending shifting from Middle English -eth (e.g., he goeth) to -s (e.g., he goes), influenced by northern dialects and evident in texts by mid-century. Auxiliary do emerged in questions and negations, as in "Dost thou know?" from Tyndale's work, laying groundwork for contemporary syntax. These evolutions reflected broader societal changes, including the centralization of royal authority under monarchs like Henry VIII and Elizabeth I, which elevated English over Latin in official documents and courts.

Stuart Era (1603–1714)

The Stuart era (1603–1714) represented a pivotal phase in the evolution of Early Modern English, building on the foundations laid during the while witnessing accelerated standardization, lexical enrichment, and the maturation of phonological shifts. This period, encompassing the reigns of James I through , was shaped by political upheavals such as the , the Restoration, and the , alongside cultural advancements like the publication of the King James Bible in 1611, which exerted a profound influence on literary and religious . Printing presses proliferated, disseminating texts more widely and promoting orthographic consistency, while the establishment of the Royal Society in fostered scientific discourse that introduced specialized terminology. Linguistically, English transitioned toward greater uniformity, though regional dialects persisted, and the became more accessible to a burgeoning through expanded . Vocabulary expansion was one of the most striking developments, with an estimated 10,000 to 12,000 new words entering the lexicon between 1500 and 1650, many of which persisted into modern usage. This growth stemmed from multiple sources: Renaissance humanism spurred borrowings from Latin and Greek, such as abdicate (from Latin abdicare, first attested around 1550 but widespread by the 17th century) and democracy (from Greek via Latin, entering in the 1570s); colonial explorations and trade introduced terms from indigenous languages, like tobacco from Arawakan via Spanish in the early 1600s; and French influences continued post-Norman Conquest, evident in words like balloon (from French ballon, circa 1590s). Native coinages also proliferated, often through compounding or affixation, as in eyeglass or foolhardy. Debates among scholars, such as those in the 17th century advocating "inkhorn terms" (pedantic Latinisms), highlighted tensions between purism and enrichment, with writers like Ben Jonson favoring classical loans while others promoted vernacular alternatives. The scientific revolution further accelerated this, with terms like telescope (coined by Galileo in 1611, adopted in English shortly after) reflecting observational advancements. Grammatical structures underwent refinement toward modern forms, with increased regularization and simplification. Verb conjugation saw the decline of strong verb forms, as irregular past tenses like holp (helped) gave way to weak -ed endings, a trend accelerating in the 17th century; by 1700, most verbs followed analytic patterns using auxiliaries. The use of do-support in questions and negations became more entrenched, as in "Dost thou not know?" evolving from earlier emphatic uses, standardizing by the Restoration period. Pronominal systems shifted, with thou fading in formal speech in favor of you for singular address, reflecting social leveling post-Civil War, though it lingered in dialects and poetry. Noun plurals mostly stabilized as -s, but relics like children (from Middle English childer) endured. Punctuation innovations, such as the apostrophe for possessives (e.g., king's instead of kings), emerged in the early 17th century, initially sporadic but normative by mid-century. The King James Bible exemplified these traits, employing majestic yet accessible syntax that influenced prose for generations. Phonological changes, particularly the ongoing , profoundly altered pronunciation, rendering late 16th-century texts like Shakespeare's somewhat archaic to 18th-century ears. This raised long vowels: /iː/ became /aɪ/ (e.g., time pronounced closer to modern /taɪm/), /uː/ to /aʊ/ (house as /haʊs/), and /eː/ to /iː/ (see retaining but shifting quality), with effects peaking in the 1600s. Diphthongs simplified, and consonants like initial /kn-/ lost the /k/ in some contexts (e.g., knight from /kniçt/ to /naɪt/). Rhoticity remained strong in most dialects. , meanwhile, stabilized post-1630 due to printers' conventions, though inconsistencies persisted, such as ie for /iː/ in believe versus ei in ceiling. These shifts, combined with lexical influxes, bridged Early Modern English toward its late modern form.

Transition to Modern English

The transition from Early Modern English to occurred primarily during the late 17th and 18th centuries, a period marked by accelerating and subtle shifts in , vocabulary, and that bridged the variable language of the to the more uniform form recognized today. This era, often dated from around to , saw English evolve under the influence of expanding , colonial activities, and the Enlightenment, with the language becoming more codified through printed works and prescriptive efforts. Scholars typically delineate Early Modern English as concluding by or 1776, giving way to Late Modern English, though changes were gradual rather than abrupt. A key driver of the transition was the intensification of orthographic standardization, building on the foundations laid by 16th-century printing but reaching maturity in the 18th century through dictionaries and grammars that fixed spellings and usage. Samuel Johnson's A Dictionary of the English Language (1755), which documented over 42,000 words with quotations from literature, played a pivotal role in establishing authoritative spellings and meanings, influencing subsequent lexicography and reducing regional variations in written English. Complementing this, Robert Lowth's A Short Introduction to English Grammar (1762) promoted prescriptive rules for syntax and punctuation, reinforcing a sense of correctness that curbed the orthographic flux of earlier periods. By the late 18th century, these works, alongside the rise of periodicals and educational reforms, had largely stabilized spelling, making written English more consistent across social classes and regions. Grammatically, the transition involved the consolidation of analytic structures over synthetic ones, with several Early Modern features fading or standardizing. The use of the auxiliary do in affirmative statements and questions, which had emerged variably in the , became more entrenched in the , particularly in formal writing, as evidenced in personal correspondence corpora showing its spread across socioeconomic groups. The second-person singular pronoun and its forms largely disappeared from standard usage by the mid-, replaced by the plural you for all addresses, reflecting social leveling and politeness norms influenced by French models during the Restoration. Verb morphology simplified further, with the third-person singular marker shifting from variable -eth/-s forms to the consistent -s ending, a change tracked in 18th-century letters where urban middle classes led the innovation. Syntax grew more rigid, with increased reliance on prepositions and fixed word order, diminishing case endings that lingered from . Phonologically, the Great Vowel Shift, largely completed by 1700, saw its remnants stabilize, while new developments like the smoothing of diphthongs and incipient loss of post-vocalic /r/ in southern British varieties began to emerge, setting the stage for modern accents. Lexical growth accelerated due to scientific advancements and global trade, incorporating thousands of terms from Latin, French, and indigenous languages via empire-building; for instance, words like algebra and chocolate entered common parlance. Sociolinguistic factors, including urbanization and class mobility in post-Glorious Revolution England (1689-1783), propelled these changes, with women's letters showing faster adoption of innovative forms in urban settings. Overall, this transition transformed English into a more accessible, global language, primed for 19th-century industrialization.

Orthographic Features

Spelling Variations and Standardization

During the Early Modern English period (c. 1500–1700), spelling was highly variable, with no universally accepted standards, leading to multiple orthographic forms for the same word even within a single author's works or printed editions. This inconsistency arose from regional dialectal differences, evolving pronunciations influenced by the [Great Vowel Shift](/page/Great_Vowel Shift), and the personal habits of scribes and early printers, resulting in texts where words like "name" might appear as "naame," "nāme," or "name." Such variations were particularly pronounced in manuscripts but persisted in print until the late , as evidenced by analyses of corpora like the Early English Books Online, which document significant spelling variability in mid-period texts. The advent of the in , introduced by in 1476, initiated a gradual process of orthographic stabilization by reproducing texts on a larger scale and favoring the conventions of the London Chancery dialect, which emphasized forms like "love" over regional alternatives such as "luf." Printers, however, often imposed their own house styles or copied inconsistent sources, so early printed books from the 1500s still exhibited significant flux; for example, Edmund Spenser's The Faerie Queene (1590) shows "knight" spelled as "knight," "knyght," and "knight" interchangeably. By the mid-17th century, printing's expansion had reduced these variations, with printed English achieving greater uniformity in common words, though specialized or spellings remained fluid. Reform proposals in the highlighted the era's awareness of chaos but had mixed success in promoting . John Hart, in treatises from 1551 to 1570, advocated a purely phonetic with new symbols for English sounds, decrying the "barbarous" inconsistencies of traditional , yet his ideas were largely ignored in favor of established practices. In contrast, Richard Mulcaster's Elementarie (1582) exerted broader influence by endorsing a conservative approach rooted in usage and tradition; he compiled nearly 9,000 recommended spellings, establishing norms like the magic -e (e.g., "made" vs. "mad") and doubled consonants (e.g., "running"), which became fixtures in subsequent . These efforts, combined with the revival of classical learning, also introduced etymological spellings, such as inserting 'gh' in "night" to echo or 'b' in "doubt" from Latin dubitare, complicating but enriching the system. By the late 17th century, the cumulative effects of , scholarly advocacy, and the proliferation of reference works like Robert Cawdrey's A Table Alphabeticall ()—the first monolingual —had advanced toward greater consistency, particularly in London-published materials that served as models for the emerging standard. This progression laid essential foundations for 18th-century codification, though full standardization awaited later grammarians; quantitative studies of printed corpora indicate that spelling variability decreased significantly from 1500 to 1700, shifting from a flexible, author-driven system to one increasingly governed by convention.

Influence of Printing and Typography

The introduction of the to by in 1476 marked a pivotal shift in the of Early Modern English, as it enabled the of texts and began to favor the London dialect (Chancery Standard), which incorporated East Midlands influences. Caxton's press in Westminster produced works like The Recuyell of the Historyes of Troye (c. 1474, printed abroad but influential), which consistently employed London-based spellings, thereby reducing regional variations and promoting a more uniform written form across printed materials. This mechanical reproduction minimized the inconsistencies of scribal copying, where individual scribes often introduced dialectal quirks, and instead fixed spellings in religious, literary, and educational texts, laying the groundwork for broader standardization. Typographical practices further shaped orthographic conventions, particularly through the adoption of specific letterforms and distinctions borrowed from Latin and continental printing traditions. Early prints used (Gothic) type, which preserved medieval appearances but gradually gave way to roman typefaces by the mid-16th century, influencing the visual and functional separation of letters like u and v, as well as i and j. Printers standardized v for initial positions and u for medial ones (e.g., "vsed" for "used," "saue" for "save"), a convention that solidified by the mid-1600s to improve readability and justify lines in . Similarly, the thorn (þ) and (ð) were replaced with the digraph "th" due to the lack of these letters in type sets, drawing from Latin-influenced (e.g., "þe" becoming "the"). These changes, driven by the practical demands of , contributed to a more systematic , though full uniformity was not achieved until later efforts by grammarians. By the mid-17th century, had significantly curtailed variation, with most printed works adhering to consistent forms by around 1650, particularly in and guides that disseminated standardized rules. Examples include the stabilization of words like "colour" over variants such as "color" or "colur," reinforced through widely circulated texts by authors like Shakespeare and Elyot. This typographical influence not only preserved emerging norms but also boosted rates by making texts more accessible and predictable, ultimately transitioning English toward modern orthographic stability.

Phonological Characteristics

Consonant Developments

During the Early Modern English period (c. 1500–1700), developments were relatively modest compared to the dramatic vowel shifts occurring simultaneously, with changes primarily involving the simplification of clusters and the loss or weakening of specific sounds in certain environments. These alterations contributed to increasing discrepancies between and , as practices began to standardize while spoken forms evolved. Most core , such as stops (/p, t, k, b, d, g/), nasals (/m, n/), and (/l, r, j, w/), remained stable in their articulation and distribution, but targeted reductions affected fricatives and clusters inherited from earlier stages of the . A key development was the near-complete loss of the velar fricative /x/ (spelled ⟨gh⟩ or ⟨ch⟩), a process initiated in late Middle English but finalized in Early Modern English, especially in post-vocalic positions. For instance, words like night (from /nixt/) and enough (from /ɪˈnɔx/) lost the fricative entirely by the 16th century, resulting in /naɪt/ and /ɪˈnʌf/, with compensatory lengthening of the preceding vowel in some cases before the Great Vowel Shift applied. This change affected Germanic-derived vocabulary and eliminated /x/ from the southern English phonemic inventory, except in Scottish varieties. Similarly, the post-vocalic allophone in words like thought disappeared, further streamlining the system. Initial consonant clusters also underwent reduction, particularly those involving obstruent + liquid or nasal sequences. The /k/ in /kn-/ (e.g., knee, knight, know) and /g/ in /gn-/ (e.g., gnat, gnaw) became silent by the mid-17th century, a change that spread from northern dialects to the south and was reflected in pronunciation guides of the period. Likewise, the /w/ in /wr-/ clusters (e.g., write, wring, wrong) was lost around the same time, simplifying these onsets to /r/; this followed the earlier Middle English loss of /w/ in /wl-/ (e.g., lisp from OE wlisp). These reductions were unconditioned sound changes affecting a limited set of native words, enhancing ease of articulation without impacting the overall consonant inventory significantly. In addition, the lateral approximant /l/ was lost in specific environments, particularly after low back vowels and before velars or labials, as in walk, talk, folk, half, palm, and calf. This velarization and subsequent deletion, which began in late Middle English, became widespread in Early Modern English by the 16th century, especially in southern dialects, leading to forms like /wɔːk/ and /tɔːk/. Such changes were lexically conditioned, sparing words like milk or silk where /l/ preceded alveolars. Final consonant clusters saw minor simplifications, such as occasional loss of stops in combinations like /mp/ > /m/ (e.g., tempt occasionally realized as /tɛmt/), but these were sporadic and dialectally variable. French loanwords introduced or reinforced the fricative /ʒ/ (as in pleasure, measure), establishing it as a distinct in the system by the , though it remained marginal compared to /ʃ/. Overall, these developments reflect a trend toward phonological simplification, influenced by regional variation and the spread of a southeastern standard through and .

Vowel Shifts and Diphthongs

The (GVS) represents one of the most significant phonological transformations in the , occurring primarily between approximately 1400 and 1600, during the early stages of the Early Modern English period. This affected the long stressed vowels, causing them to raise in tongue height or diphthongize, which fundamentally altered the vowel inventory and contributed to the divergence between Middle English pronunciation and that of later forms. The shift is often described as a "drag chain," where the raising or diphthongization of higher vowels created phonetic space for lower ones to follow suit. The core mechanism of the GVS involved the diphthongization of the highest long monophthongs and the raising of the mid and low long monophthongs. For instance, /iː/ (as in tīme) shifted to /əɪ/ and later /aɪ/, while /uː/ (as in hūs) became /əʊ/ and eventually /aʊ/. The mid vowels /eː/ (as in mē) raised to /iː/, and /oː/ (as in gōs) to /uː/. Lower in the system, /aː/ (as in nāme) raised to /æː/ or /ɛː/, which later developed into /eː/ or /eɪ/ in many dialects. Additionally, /ɛː/ (from earlier mergers, as in brēken) raised to /eː/, and /ɔː/ (as in bōt) to /oː/. These changes were gradual and regionally variable, with evidence from contemporary texts like Thomas Speght's 1598 edition of Chaucer showing glosses such as "tale" as "taile" to bridge pronunciation gaps. To illustrate the primary mappings of the GVS, the following table summarizes key examples using International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA) notations for Middle English (ME) and representative Early Modern English (EModE) outcomes:
ME VowelExample Word (ME)EModE ShiftModern English Equivalent
/iː/tīme> /aɪ/time /taɪm/
/eː/mē> /iː/me /miː/
/aː/nāme> /eɪ/name /neɪm/
/ɛː/brēken> /eɪ/break /breɪk/
/ɔː/bōt> /oʊ/boat /boʊt/
/oː/gōs> /uː/goose /guːs/
/uː/hūs> /aʊ/house /haʊs/
This table highlights representative changes; actual realizations varied by dialect and time, with the shift completing in by around 1600 but lingering in some northern varieties. The GVS spared short vowels, preserving sounds like /ɪ/ in hit and /ʊ/ in put, but its impact on long vowels created the irregular spelling-pronunciation relationship seen today, as stabilized before the shift fully took hold. In addition to the monophthong shifts, Early Modern English witnessed notable developments in diphthongs, building on pre-existing forms and the GVS outcomes. Original ME diphthongs like /ei/ (as in dei) and /ou/ (as in hous) largely monophthongized to /eː/ and /oː/ by the early , only to undergo further raising via the GVS to /iː/ and /uː/ in many cases, though in open syllables they often became /eɪ/ and /oʊ/ (as in day /deɪ/ and boat /boʊt/). New centering diphthongs emerged through vowel lengthening before /r/ and certain consonants, yielding /ɪə/, /eə/, and /ʊə/ (e.g., deer /dɪər/, /beər/, tour /tʊər/). Triphthongs from ME, such as /aɪə/ in , smoothed to disyllabic forms like /aɪ.ə/ before stabilizing as /aɪə/. These diphthongal innovations enriched the phonological system, with rhyming patterns in Shakespearean texts (ca. 1590–1613) evidencing /aɪ/ and /aʊ/ as fully diphthongal, distinct from monophthongs. Regional differences persisted, such as less diphthongization in . Overall, the interplay between raising and diphthongization during the GVS and subsequent adjustments defined the prosodic profile of Early Modern English, influencing , , and everyday speech. By the Stuart era (post-1603), these changes were largely entrenched in the standard dialect, setting the stage for vowels while highlighting the period's phonetic dynamism.

Prosody and Rhoticity

Early Modern English prosody encompassed the patterns of stress, , and intonation that shaped spoken and poetic language during the period from approximately to 1700. Word stress in Early Modern English followed a system influenced by both native Germanic patterns and loanwords from Latin and , with primary stress typically falling on the first in Germanic-derived words, such as or father. This native pattern contrasted with the developing "English Stress Rule" for Latinate borrowings, where stress was assigned to the penultimate if it was heavy (containing a long or ending in more than one ), as in demónstrate, or to the antepenultimate if the penultimate was light, as in cónsulate. These rules, emerging in late and solidifying by the , allowed for variability in pronunciation, particularly in polysyllabic words, contributing to rhythmic flexibility in verse like Shakespeare's . Phrasal stress and rhythm in Early Modern English emphasized content words while reducing function words, creating a stress-timed rhythm similar to Modern English, where unstressed syllables were often shortened or centralized to schwa, as in the rapid elision of vowels in phrases like "th' old man." Intonation patterns, though sparsely documented due to the lack of audio records, likely featured rising contours for questions and falling for statements, with pitch accents aligning to stressed syllables to convey emphasis or emotion in dramatic speech, as reconstructed from rhetorical treatises of the era. Reductions in unstressed syllables became more pronounced during this period, leading to apocope (loss of final unstressed vowels) and syncope (loss of medial ones), which tightened prosodic structure and influenced poetic scansion, evident in the contraction of forms like 'tis for it is. Rhoticity in Early Modern English was fully realized, with the consonant /r/ pronounced in all positions, including post-vocalic environments before consonants or at word ends, distinguishing it from the non-rhotic varieties that emerged later in southeastern around the . This rhotic pronunciation, typically a trill or tap [ɾ] or approximant [ɹ], affected vowel quality minimally compared to later linking-r phenomena, but it contributed to a robust consonantal rhythm in speech, as seen in orthographic representations of 'r'-sounds in texts like the King James Bible (e.g., "father" as /ˈfaːðə/ with clear /r/). Regional variations existed, with stronger rhoticity in northern and western dialects, but the prestige variety remained rhotic throughout the period, preserving the historical Germanic /r/ without the vowel coloring that characterizes some modern non-rhotic accents. The persistence of rhoticity supported prosodic clarity in verse, allowing 'r' to serve as a divider without .

Grammatical Structures

Pronouns and Address Forms

In Early Modern English (c. 1500–1700), the second-person pronoun system retained distinctions inherited from but underwent significant simplification, particularly in the nominative and accusative forms. The singular nominative was and accusative thee, while the plural nominative was ye and accusative you. Over the period, ye increasingly yielded to you as the standard nominative plural, a shift that began in Late and stabilized by the late , reflecting analogical leveling in the . Simultaneously, you encroached on the singular domain, becoming the default second-person form by the end of the era, while and thee persisted mainly in informal, dialectal, or emphatic contexts before largely disappearing from standard usage. The choice between and you encoded , as analyzed in the seminal framework of power and solidarity semantics. (the T-form) signified intimacy, subordination, or emotional intensity, often used reciprocally among equals or unilaterally by superiors to inferiors, whereas you (the V-form) conveyed formality, , or distance, aligning with emerging norms of social in a period of increasing . This , rooted in Romance influences like French tu/vous, was not rigidly symmetric; non-reciprocal -use by authority figures underscored hierarchical power, as seen in legal and religious texts where addresses humanity with to emphasize dominance. By the 18th century's onset, the asymmetry favored you universally, driven by urban standards and the avoidance of potential offense in mixed social interactions. Nominal address forms complemented pronominal choices, providing additional layers of respect or familiarity. Common titles included sir, madam, master, and mistress for social superiors or strangers, often paired with you to reinforce formality; for instance, in Shakespeare's plays, inferiors address superiors as "your lordship" with you, while intimates use bare names or kinship terms like "father" with thou. Familial or affectionate forms such as "sweetheart" or "knave" appeared with thou in close relationships or insults, highlighting affective variance; statistical analysis of Shakespeare's corpus reveals thou in intimate or hostile exchanges versus you in formal ones. These forms evolved under influence from courtly etiquette and print culture, promoting standardized politeness that marginalized thou in prose by the Restoration. First- and third-person pronouns showed relative stability, with I/me and he/him forms largely modern but for occasional archaic spellings like ye for the (a genitive remnant). Possessives like mine and thine preceded vowels, mirroring my and thy, and declined in favor of my and thy by 1700. Gendered third-person pronouns (he/she/it) were consistent, though she occasionally appeared as sho in dialects. Address practices extended to reflexive forms, where himself and equivalents were standard, but pronoun shifts influenced overall toward generality.

Verb Morphology and Syntax

In Early Modern English (c. 1500–1700), verb morphology exhibited significant regularization and simplification compared to Middle English, with ongoing shifts in inflectional endings that reflected regional and social variations. The third-person singular present indicative saw a gradual replacement of the traditional -eth ending (from southern dialects) with -s (from northern influence), as in he cometh transitioning to he comes; this change, driven by and dialect contact, became widespread by the late 17th century, particularly in standardizing printed texts. Plural present forms leveled toward a zero ending, eliminating earlier -en or -e suffixes, so that we/they go became uniform, though dialectal retention of -en persisted in some rural speech. Strong verbs displayed variability in past tense and participle forms, with some ablaut patterns weakening toward regular -ed endings, such as dive, dove shifting to dived, while others like write, wrote/writ, written/writ showed alternation between strong and weak paradigms influenced by . The present participle standardized on -ing (e.g., running), supplanting older -ende, though -en forms lingered in poetic or dialectal use; past participles for weak verbs used -ed/-d, with northern -t variants (e.g., left alongside leaved). Modal verbs, such as can, may, will, increasingly detached from main verb inflections, losing endings like -est or -eth and functioning as uninflected , a process tied to their . Syntactically, Early Modern English verbs participated in a trend toward fixed , reducing the flexibility seen in earlier periods, though placement could still precede the in emphatic contexts (e.g., Never was I so grieved). The emergence of marked a pivotal innovation, initially for emphasis (e.g., I do love it) in the , then extending to (do not go) and yes/no questions (Do you go?) by the 17th, replacing direct verb movement; this periphrastic use, absent in but revived via Celtic influence or internal analogy, standardized by 1700, aiding prosodic and informational structure. Auxiliary constructions evolved with the perfect tense using have + past participle (e.g., I have seen) becoming normative for transitives, while be + past participle declined except in passives; the progressive be + -ing (e.g., I am writing) gained traction for ongoing actions, especially in speech representation. Negation shifted from preverbal not (e.g., he not goeth) to post-auxiliary placement with do-support (he doth not go), and multiple negation remained common in non-standard varieties (e.g., I know not nothing). These developments, documented in corpora like the Helsinki Corpus, reflect sociolinguistic pressures toward clarity and uniformity in an era of expanding print and administration.

Noun and Adjective Declensions

In Early Modern English (c. 1500–1700), noun declensions had undergone substantial simplification from the synthetic case system of , retaining primarily the and plural markers as the sole regular inflections. The nominative, accusative, dative, and instrumental cases had merged into a common form by the end of the period, with word order and prepositions assuming their functions, leaving nouns largely invariable except for these endings. The standard inflection for nouns was the -s ending, used for both the genitive singular (indicating possession) and the nominative/accusative plural. For example, king became king's in the genitive (the king's crown) and kings in the plural (the kings of England). Irregular plurals, inherited from earlier stages, included umlaut formations like mouse, mice, suffixation with -en as in child, children, and zero plurals such as sheep, sheep. The genitive -s originally lacked an apostrophe in the 16th century, with the apostrophe emerging optionally around 1550, becoming more common in the 17th century, and fully standardized by about 1700; plural genitives, however, did not use it, as in the kings' wives. Alternative genitive constructions persisted, reflecting dialectal and stylistic variation. The "his-genitive" or possessive dative, a periphrastic form using his (or occasionally her or their), was widespread, particularly after sibilant-ending nouns to avoid awkward clusters, as in Jesus his tears or the queen his crown. This construction, analogous to the s-genitive, declined in formal writing by the late but survived in speech and nonstandard varieties. Additionally, the group genitive allowed the -'s to attach to entire noun phrases, shifting from earlier periphrases like the kinges wyf of to the king of ’s , facilitating possession over complex structures. Adjective declensions in Early Modern English exhibited even greater reduction, having lost all case, number, and inflections by the transition from , rendering most adjectives invariable. Unlike Old English strong and weak paradigms (e.g., se gōda mann 'the good man' vs. gōdan mann in oblique cases), Early Modern adjectives preceded nouns without agreement, as in a good man or good men. The sole surviving inflections were for degree: the synthetic comparative -er (e.g., great, greater) and superlative -est (e.g., greatest), though these were increasingly supplemented or replaced by periphrastic more and most, especially for longer adjectives. Variation in adjectival comparison was common, with synthetic, analytic, and double forms coexisting; for instance, easy, easier, easiest competed with more easy and emphatic more easier, the latter praised by grammarians like for stylistic effect. By the late , prescriptive norms favored -er/-est for monosyllabic adjectives and more/most for polysyllabic ones, though mixtures persisted in and speech. This analytic trend mirrored broader grammatical shifts, reducing reliance on suffixes and enhancing .

Lexical Developments

Borrowings from Other Languages

During the Early Modern English period (c. 1500–1700), the lexicon expanded dramatically through borrowings from multiple languages, reflecting intensified cultural, scholarly, commercial, and exploratory contacts across and beyond. This era marked the peak of lexical importation in English history, with estimates suggesting tens of thousands of new words entered the language, primarily to denote novel concepts in science, arts, , and administration while also enriching stylistic options through synonymy. Borrowings were facilitated by the revival of classical texts, colonial ventures, and trade networks, leading to a vocabulary influx that sometimes sparked debates like the "inkhorn controversy," where critics decried overly pedantic foreign terms as obscuring native clarity. Latin provided the largest share of borrowings, driven by its status as the lingua franca of scholarship, law, and emerging sciences during the ; over 33,000 Latin-derived words entered English between 1500 and 1899, with the heaviest concentration in the 16th and 17th centuries to express abstract and technical ideas absent in native stock. Practical needs for precise terminology in and motivated direct adoptions, alongside prestige-driven "inkhorn terms" to elevate English prose to classical standards. Representative examples include nouns such as , , and ; verbs like benefit, eradicate, and extinguish; and adjectives including appropriate, conspicuous, and scientific. Many arrived via scholarly translations and treatises, though often involved anglicization of forms. Greek contributions, frequently mediated through Latin intermediaries but including direct loans, numbered in the thousands and focused on philosophy, medicine, and rhetoric, aligning with the period's classical revival; a multitude of such terms were adopted from the 14th to 16th centuries amid renewed interest in ancient texts. These borrowings supplied specialized vocabulary for intellectual discourse, such as anatomy, emphasis, metaphor, and system, often entering via university curricula and printed editions of Greek works. The influx complemented Latin loans, creating layered synonym sets that allowed nuanced expression in literature and scholarship. French remained a steady source, building on Norman legacies but introducing fresh terms through diplomatic ties, Huguenot migrations, and cultural exchanges; several hundred words were borrowed in this period, particularly in domains like governance, cuisine, and fashion. Examples include assassin (via French from Arabic roots but popularized then), bigot, carcass, detail, and silhouette, reflecting ongoing elite influences and the need for refined descriptors in courtly and artistic contexts. These loans often retained French phonology and morphology, enhancing English's expressive range without overwhelming native forms. Italian loans, spurred by Renaissance humanism, artistic patronage, and travel to , totaled around 200–300 in the period, concentrating in music, architecture, and commerce to capture Italy's cultural prestige. Key examples encompass (from balcone), cameo, , , piano, sonata, and in Shakespearean usage, argosie () and . These entered via diplomats, artists, and texts like John Florio's Italian-English dictionary (1598 and 1611), enriching dramatic and poetic registers. Spanish and Portuguese borrowings arose from exploration, conquest, and Atlantic trade, introducing approximately 150–200 words each, mainly denoting New World flora, fauna, and commodities; Spanish examples include alligator (from el lagarto), avocado, barbecue, chocolate, embargo, mosquito, and tornado, while Portuguese contributed albacore, cashew, flamingo, and marmalade (from marmeleiro). These loans, documented in travel narratives and colonial reports, filled lexical gaps for exotic goods and phenomena, with many first attested in 16th-century texts. Dutch influences, stemming from Anglo-Dutch rivalries and alliances, yielded about 100–150 terms related to seafaring, , and , such as deck, , , skipper, , and waggon. These practical adoptions, often via merchants and naval encounters, integrated seamlessly into everyday and technical vocabularies by the late .

Innovations and Semantic Changes

During the Early Modern English period (c. 1500–1700), lexical innovations primarily arose through native word-formation processes such as compounding, affixation, and conversion, enabling speakers to create neologisms that addressed emerging scientific, cultural, and social needs without relying solely on borrowings. Compounding involved joining existing words or elements to form novel terms, exemplified by Shakespearean coinages like eyeball (from The Tempest, 1611) and barefaced (from Macbeth, 1606), which combined visual and descriptive elements to denote new concepts. Affixation expanded the lexicon by attaching prefixes and suffixes to bases, often adapting borrowed affixes for native use; for instance, the prefix dis- appeared in words like discontent (c. 1520s), while suffixes such as -ment produced amazement (c. 1590s), reflecting heightened emotional expression in literature. Conversion, or zero-derivation, shifted words between parts of speech without morphological alteration, a process particularly productive in this era due to the flexibility of English syntax. Notable examples include nouns converted to verbs, such as bottle (c. 16th century) and skin (to cover, 1547; to strip, 1591), as well as verbs to nouns like remove (1553) and diggings meaning 'mine' or 'excavation site' (mid-17th century). These innovations contributed to an estimated doubling of the English vocabulary, with native formations accounting for roughly 50–60% of new terms, fostering greater expressiveness in prose and drama. Literary figures like Shakespeare exemplified this creativity, introducing over 1,700 words through such methods, including conversions like swagger (verb from noun, c. 1590s) and compounds like lonely (from alone, c. 1590s). Semantic changes in Early Modern English often involved shifts in word meanings driven by metaphorical extension, metonymy, and cultural evolution, leading to increased polysemy and adaptation to Renaissance humanism and scientific inquiry. Pejoration, where meanings acquired negative connotations, is illustrated by hussy, which narrowed from 'housewife' (a respectable term for a woman managing a household, c. 1500s) to 'promiscuous woman' or 'prostitute' by the mid-17th century, reflecting patriarchal social attitudes. Conversely, amelioration elevated neutral or negative senses; for example, pretty transitioned from 'cunning' or 'sly' (Middle English inheritance) to 'attractive' or 'pleasing' during the 16th century, as seen in Elizabethan poetry. Broadening occurred in terms like girl, which extended from 'young child of either sex' (c. 1500s) to specifically 'young female' by the 17th century, while narrowing is evident in meat, shifting from 'food in general' to 'animal flesh' under the influence of specialized culinary discourse. These changes, documented in corpora like the Helsinki Corpus, enhanced the language's nuance, with semantic innovation paralleling the era's intellectual expansion.

References

  1. https://www.wtamu.edu/~mjacobsen/histeng.htm
  2. http://eweb.furman.edu/~mmenzer/gvs/what.htm
  3. https://chaucer.fas.harvard.edu/pages/great-vowel-shift
  4. https://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kemmer/Words04/history/index.html
  5. https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-12205084
  6. https://www.etymonline.com/word/chocolate
  7. https://nosweatshakespeare.com/resources/words-shakespeare-invented/
  8. https://www.oed.com/discover/early-modern-english-an-overview/
  9. https://exhibits.lib.ku.edu/exhibits/show/english-language/middle-and-early-modern
  10. https://www.thehistoryofenglish.com/early-modern-english
  11. https://guides.loc.gov/english-print/famous-printers
  12. https://academic.oup.com/book/4263/chapter/146128073
  13. https://oxfordre.com/linguistics/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.001.0001/acrefore-9780199384655-e-264
  14. https://www.oed.com/discover/early-modern-english-spelling-grammar-and-pronunciation/
  15. https://linguisticus.wordpress.com/2014/06/24/grammar-in-early-modern-english/
  16. https://schwa.byu.edu/files/2015/04/W2015-Wright.pdf
  17. http://commons.princeton.edu/shakespeares-language/wp-content/uploads/sites/41/2017/09/Nevalainen-Early-Modern-English-Lexis-and-Semantics.pdf
  18. https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/28049/chapter/211984787
  19. https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/abstract/document/obo-9780199772810/obo-9780199772810-0270.xml
  20. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-history-of-the-english-language/3C7F48434EE6B219DDAB7F4F333BFE39
  21. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-companion-to-english-dictionaries/samuel-johnson-and-the-first-english-dictionary/D3999C74ED1D776735E1C3F682E43F9B
  22. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5389951
  23. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-handbook-of-english-historical-linguistics/early-and-late-modern-english-grammars-as-evidence-in-english-historical-linguistics/72B3E7DF6F50760CF00DF303CD7BBA08
  24. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321597619_History_of_the_English_language
  25. https://www.jbe-platform.com/content/books/9789027263834
  26. https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1075/ahs.8/html
  27. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/english-language-and-linguistics/article/terttu-nevalainen-minna-palandercollin-and-tanja-saily-eds-patterns-of-change-in-18thcentury-english-a-sociolinguistic-approach-advances-in-historical-sociolinguistics-8-amsterdam-and-new-york-benjamins-2018-pp-xi-311-isbn-9789027201034/D60A3A99F9BE6CBC6E2A052B05B7C8BD
  28. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7861277/
  29. https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%257CA310365491&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=00283754&p=LitRC&sw=w
  30. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-349-21925-4_11
  31. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/197868819.pdf
  32. https://proceedings.uinsa.ac.id/index.php/iconfahum/article/download/3186/2128/
  33. https://www.ruf.rice.edu/~kemmer/Histengl/spelling.html
  34. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/english-language-and-linguistics/article/positional-spelling-redistribution-wordinitial-uv-and-ij-in-early-modern-english-15001700/405A8D8C28AA02E28F48FE5A026973E0
  35. https://www.uni-bamberg.de/fileadmin/uni/fakultaeten/split_lehrstuehle/englische_sprachwissenschaft/personen/dokumente/Schlueter/EModE_Phonology_JS_offprint.pdf
  36. https://alg.manifoldapp.org/read/language-connections-with-the-past-a-history-of-the-english-language/section/95a894f8-7906-47bc-93ab-ffb475422ee4
  37. https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/24-900-introduction-to-linguistics-fall-2012/763f545266e2fd8dd3d424c368785ba8_MIT24_900F12_HisLingsumary.pdf
  38. https://cpercy.artsci.utoronto.ca/courses/EModEPhonology.htm
  39. https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/kn-in-knee.248701/
  40. https://d-nb.info/1122110723/34
  41. https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9780748634699-012/html
  42. https://repository.ubn.ru.nl/bitstream/handle/2066/43143/266908.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
  43. https://english.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Prosody-In-Brinton-Bergs2017Ch.-4S_057-076_Donka.pdf
  44. https://oxfordre.com/literature/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190201098.001.0001/acrefore-9780190201098-e-1085
  45. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/new-cambridge-history-of-the-english-language/history-of-r-in-english/5E6195E7D73107D99C3724EED39AF365
  46. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9120598/
  47. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/231779817_A_history_of_hyper-rhoticity_in_English
  48. http://web.stanford.edu/~eckert/PDF/brownGilman1972.pdf
  49. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229649675_Thou_and_you_in_Early_Modern_English_Brown_and_Gilman_re-appraised
  50. https://www.academia.edu/49302820/The_Pronouns_of_Address_in_Early_Modern_English_The_Generalization_of_You_and_the_Abandonment_of_Thou
  51. http://mapageweb.umontreal.ca/tuitekj/cours/2611pdf/Brown-Gilman-Pronouns.pdf
  52. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9582.1983.tb00316.x
  53. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/politeness-in-the-history-of-english/terms-of-address-in-early-modern-english/F819681C1BA0E8BECCFF1EC7F291219C
  54. http://wp.lancs.ac.uk/shakespearelang/files/2018/10/Isolde-van-Dorst-JTDH2018.pdf
  55. https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110879599.141/pdf
  56. https://digibuo.uniovi.es/dspace/bitstream/handle/10651/65695/TFG_JorgeMelchorRodriguez.pdf?sequence=4
  57. https://www.research.ed.ac.uk/files/3548168/Cowie_HSK_publisher_s_print.pdf
  58. https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110251593.604/html
  59. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/english-auxiliaries/auxiliaries-in-early-modern-english-and-the-rise-of-do/7A4C12FB56B9A84D06376DF6376CF172
  60. http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1028178/FULLTEXT01.pdf
  61. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/english-language-and-linguistics/article/english-genitive-variation-the-state-of-the-art1/38982D197A59C167B5B12C9FC29B20D0
  62. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-history-of-the-english-language/early-modern-english-lexis-and-semantics/0DA6E6018A1F4C4C266B44268702124C
  63. https://minerva.usc.es/bitstreams/b15d6b11-a81d-45b9-83ab-3bb15cae2175/download
  64. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233658557_The_Borrowing_of_Classical_and_Romance_Words_into_English_A_Study_Based_on_the_Electronic_Oxford_English_Dictionary
  65. https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=129273
  66. https://www.gla.ac.uk/schools/critical/research/fundedresearchprojects/wordwebs/unit3/
  67. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-guide-to-the-worlds-of-shakespeare/early-modern-english-the-language/899B330B4939FAEF419B0221585A3835
  68. https://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/Fall_1998/ling001/langchange.htm
  69. https://traugott.people.stanford.edu/sites/g/files/sbiybj28616/files/media/file/traugott2017a.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.