smatterer can see that the Danish preposition imod (contra) is not from Anglo-Saxon ongean, but from Icelandic àmoti, or imoti; and that this last cannot possibly be the parent of our English word against. Now, if the Lowland Scottish be tried by this criterion, the result will be anything but favourable to the theory of its Scandinavian origin. The presence or absence of a few Norse particles proves nothing decisive either way. Those which are wanting may have become obsolete, and those which actually occur might be introduced by the Danish invaders. But the existence of a large mass of words of this class, which never were Icelandic, but have their undoubted counterparts in Anglo-Saxon, fixes the character of the dialect beyond all controversy. We could furnish a long list of such terms; we will at present content ourselves with a few of the most ordinary and essential particles in Anglo-Saxon and Icelandic-leaving it to our readers' ayont the Tweed' to decide whether the Scottish equivalents are more nearly allied to the former or the latter. We do not think it necessary to give the Northumbrian forms, as they are in general mere dialectical variations from southern English; ex. gr., aboot for about, amang for among; and generally identical, or nearly so, with the Lowland Scottish. We admit that a number of particles occur in this last-named dialect which are not found in modern English; nor can it surprise any one acquainted with the history of the British islands during the ninth and two following centuries, to find a few of Scandinavian descent, * The old Scottish form atweesh is clearly the Lower Saxon twischen. Amell between, is found in Northumberland, but not in Scotland. especially especially among the adverbs. But the number of ancient and radical particles derived from this source is much smaller than might have been expected. In fact, we doubt whether Dr. Jamieson's Dictionary furnishes six simple prepositions and conjunctions unequivocally of Norse origin. The evidence furnished by the preposition by is so strong that we could be content to rest our case on it alone. There is not a vestige of the word in Scandinavian,* either as a separate particle or in composition. In Lowland Scottish it is extensively employed in both capacities, and enters intimately into the very structure of the language; often coalescing so closely with the fellow-members of a compound term as to be with difficulty distinguished. It is sufficient to allege the following vernacular terms in proof of this assertion: aboon (supra)-q. d., à, or onbe-ufan; but (sine), be-utan; ben (inner apartment), be-innan; but (outer apartment), of the same origin as but (without); to say nothing of be-cast, be-west, belive, bedene, and a multitude of others. To sum up the matter in a small compass, we say, most confidently, that if the truly Christian sentiment let by-ganes be by-ganes,' and the familiar household words but and ben are genuine Scottish phrases, Scottish is not and cannot be a Scandinavian dialect. But,' says Dr. Jamieson, it cannot be a dialect of the AngloSaxon, as there is no good reason for supposing that it was ever imported from the southern part of the island.' Here we plainly perceive the fallacy which pervades every part of the Doctor's Dissertation. We know that the speech of Lothian was neither imported from the Thames, the Severn, nor the Trent; but we know too that it stands in the closest affinity to that used on the banks of the Tees and the Tyne; being, in fact-like thatNorthumbrian Saxon, with a strong infusion of Danish and a small portion of Norman French: the very mixture which the known history of the district would lead us to expect. A careful grammatical analysis shows, moreover, that the Saxon forms the older portion or basis of the dialect; the two other component elements being demonstrably of more recent introduction. Clear as all this seems, Dr. Jamieson makes a bold attempt to bring the 'blue bonnets over the border.' He winds up an elaborate endea To those who allege the use of be as a prefix in Danish and Swedish, we reply with the following passage from Molbech's excellent Danish Dictionary: The particle be is a mere borrowed word from the German; nearly all the words compounded with it are more recent than the fourteenth century, and a great part of them not older than the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth.' We may just observe, that the auxiliary be (esse) is as foreign to the Scandinavian dialects as the preposition by. The Icelandic verb is vera; Danish, være ; Swedish, vara. Your vour to prove that the term Yule must have been derived from the Scandinavian Picts, with the following observation: The name Yule is, indeed, still used in England; but it is in the northern counties, which were possessed by a people originally the same with those who inhabited the Lowlands of Scotland.' per Valeat quantum! We happen to know that the term Yule is fectly familiar throughout the West Riding of Yorkshire, south of the Wharf and Ouse, where a dialect prevails quite distinct from the Northumbrian, and where, nevertheless, every peasant burns his Yule-log and eats his Yule-cake, up to the present time. Did they learn all this from the Picts?-Certainly not, but from the Danes, who once constituted more than half the population in our eastern counties, from the Welland to the Forth; and of whom we find unequivocal traces, as well in the dialects as in the topographical appellations of the district. The proposition that the northern counties were possessed by a people originally the same with those who inhabited the Lowlands of Scotland, being one of those commonly called convertible, we beg to state it in the following form: The Scottish Lowlands were possessed by a people originally the same with those who inhabited the north of England,-i. e., in the first instance, Northumbrian Angles, afterwards blended with Danes; and the Dano-Saxon dialect of this mixed race has in substance simultaneously descended to the present occupants of both districts.-Q. E. D. We recommend to Dr. Jamieson's consideration the following short passage from Wallingford, as, in our opinion, worth the whole of Pinkerton's Inquiry : 'Sweyn, king of Denmark, and Olave, king of Norway, a short time before invaded Yorkshire, and reduced it to subjection. For there is, and long has been, a great admixture of people of Danish race in that province, and a great similarity of language.'-(Chron. apud Gale, p. 570.) This concluding observation, equally applicable to Northum berland and Lothian, furnishes an easy and satisfactory solution of the entire question. We have already observed that the works we have undertaken to review have different degrees of literary merit: some are neces * A plain instance occurs in the present name of Whitby. In the time of Bede, and long after, it was called Streoneshalch; which the Danish occupants changed to Hvitby-q.d., the white town. All the by's in our Anglian and Northumbrian provinces are of similar origin. + Our readers can hardly need to be told that the Lowland Scotch poets of the Middle Age always call the language in which they composed, Inglis-English. For example, Dunbar in one of his controversial pieces says: 'I have on me a pair of Lothian hips Sall fairer Inglis mak, and mair perfyte, sarily meagre for want of materials; others, on account of the limited opportunities enjoyed by their compilers. In perusing their lucubrations we have frequently found cause to smile at their interpretations, and still more frequently at their etymologies; for every glossarist is, ex officio, an etymologist. We are not, however, disposed to scrutinize severely the defects of men who have done their best, but rather to thank them for preserving what might otherwise have been irretrievably lost. In the words of Wachter, Juvat hac obsoleta servari, aliquando profutura.' The spirit of scientific and rational etymology cannot fail to arise amongst us ere long, and whenever that happens these volumes will supply it with abundance of materials. Even Grose's Classical Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue' furnishes matter on which a skilful and perspicacious critic might employ himself to good purpose. Some of the compilations before us are in all respects too slight for any extended criticism. Among the smaller ones, the most respectable in point of execution is Mr. Wilbraham's Cheshire Glossary. His words are well selected, and often judiciously illustrated; and his etymologies, though frequently defective, are seldom extravagant. The insertion of the South Lancashire words-which belong to the same dialect-would have added considerably to the value of the work. Many genuine Mercian terms might also be gleaned in Staffordshire, Shropshire, and Derbyshire the sooner this is done the better, as every successive generation loses something of the speech of its forefathers. The Norfolk and Craven Glossaries are on a larger scale, and both are highly creditable to the zeal and industry of the authors. They furnish the fullest view of the two principal branches of the Anglian dialect that has hitherto been given; and ought carefully to be consulted by every one who wishes to investigate the general analogies of our tongue. We would particularly recommend the perusal of the Craven Glossary to our dramatists and novelists, who, when they introduce a Yorkshire character, generally make him speak something much more like Hampshire-occasionally even broad Somersetshire.* They have, however, now the means of studying the purest form of the West Riding dialect, syntheti cally as well as analytically. The respectable author has embodied the speech of the romantic and interesting district where he resides, in a couple of dialogues, which, though not equal to Collier's in dramatic effect, are not destitute of merit. We can, at all events, vouch for the general accuracy of the dialect and idiom. The most copious and best executed of our English vocabu The little farce of the Register Office' is an exception. The Cleveland dialect is there given with perfect fidelity, and must have been copied from the life. laries, laries is undoubtedly Mr. Brockett's Glossary of North Country Words.' He had ample materials to work upon, and he has turned them to good account. His work, though the fullest of matter, exhibits by far the smallest proportion of corrupt forms; and his explanations, especially of Northumberland words, are generally correct and satisfactory. A few North Yorkshire words appear to have escaped his notice; and we have reason to believe that many provincial terms, current in Westmoreland and Cumberland, have never been collected by any glossarist. Most of these belong to the Northumbrian dialect, and ought to be embodied in Mr. Brockett's work. It is, of course, the business of the natives to collect and transmit them, and we hope that some of them will take the hint. Dr. Jamieson's Dictionary has been so long before the public, and its merits are so well known, that any praise on our part would be superfluous. As we trust that another edition will be published ere long, incorporating both parts of the work in one regular series, we take the liberty of suggesting that it might be advantageously enlarged from the following sources:-1. The Scottish Acts of Parliament, published by the Record Commission; especially the first volume-if it ever appears.* 2. The ancient northern metrical romances; many of which are still in MS. 3. Mr. Brockett's Glossary; which is, in all essential points, in the same dialect as Dr. Jamieson's Dictionary, and furnishes valuable materials for its elucidation and correction. We shall devote more space to the last book on our list-Boucher's Archaic and Provincial Glossary'- on account of the comprehensiveness of its plan, and our wish that a work which has long been a desideratum in our literature should be executed in a creditable and satisfactory manner. The first part was published in 1832, accompanied with a promise that the following portions should appear at intervals of two months. It is, however, so much easier to project than to execute, that the three years which have since elapsed have barely sufficed for the production of part the second. We are without means to account for this extraordinary delay; and, to say the truth, we shall not much regret it, if it gives the conductors an opportunity of reforming the defects of their plan, and availing themselves of better sources of information than they at present seem to enjoy. We shall freely point out what we conceive to be the imperfections of * We ourselves rather despair of living to see either this volume-(which, considering the erudition and ability of its editor, could not fail to be of great importance) or the Anglo-Saxon and Welsh Laws.' Everything interesting to the philologist and the general scholar seems to be studiously kept back to the very last. VOL. LV. NO. CX. 2 B the |
