The Dialect of the West of England; Particularly Somersetshire by James Jennings (the mitten read aloud TXT) 📕

Het for it is still also common amongst the peasantry. In early Saxon writers, it was usually written hit, sometimes hyt.

“Als hit in heaven y-doe, Evar in yearth beene it also.” Metrical Lord’s Prayer of 1160.

Of theeäze, used as a demonstrative pronoun, both in the singular and plural, for this and these, it maybe observed, as well as of the pronunciation of many other words in the west, that we have no letters or combination of letters which, express exactly the sounds there given to such words. Theeäze is here marked as a dissyllable, but although it is sometimes decidedly two syllables, its sounds are not always thus apparent in Somerset enunciation. What is more remarkable in this world, is its equal application to the singular and the plural. Thus we say theeäze man and theäze men. But in the plural are also employed other forms of the same pronoun, namely theeäzam, theeäzamy and thizzum. This last word is, of course, decidedly the Anglo-Saxon ðissum. In the west we say therefore theeäzam here, theeäzamy here, and thizzam here for these, or these here; and sometimes without the pleonastic and unnecessary here.

For the demonstrative those of our polished dialect them, or themmy, and often them there or themmy there are the usual synonyms; as, gee I themmy there shoes; that is, give me those shoes. The objective pronoun me, is very sparingly employed indeed—I, in general supplying its place as in the preceding sentence: to this barbarism in the name of my native dialect, I must plead guilty!— if barbarism our metropolitan critics shall be pleased to term it. [Footnote: By the way I must just retort upon our polished dialect, that it has gone over to the other extreme in avoidance of the I, using me in many sentences where I ought most decidedly to be employed. It was me [Footnote: I am aware that some of our lexicographers have attempted a defence of this solecism by deriving it from the French c’est moi; but, I think it is from their affected dislike of direct egotism; and that, whenever they can, they avoid the I in order that they might not be thought at once vulgar and egotistic!] is constantly dinned in our ears for it was I: as well as indeed one word more, although not a pronoun, this is, the almost constant use in London of the verb to lay for the verb to lie, and ketch for catch. If we at head-quarters commit such blunders can we wonder at our provincial detachments falling into similar errors? none certainly more gross than this!]

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

Catch and scrabble Thic that’s yable:— Catch and scramble He who’s able.

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

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

I cannot conclude without a few observations on three very remarkable Somersetshire words, namely twordn, wordn, and zino. They are living evidences of the contractions with which that dialect very much abounds.

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

“The kid,— Asked the cause of his great distress, And also who and whence that he wer You say he was there, and I say that a wordn; You say that ‘twas he, and I tell you that twordn; You ask, will he go? I reply, not as I know; You say that he will, and Imust say, no, Zino!]

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

Wordn admits of a similar explanation; but this word is composed of two words only, war and not; instead of wornt, which analogy requires, a d is placed before n for a similar reason that the d is placed before n in twordn, namely for euphony; wordn is decidedly another of the forcible words.

Wordn fir gwain?—was he not going, may compete with any language for its energetic brevity.

Zino, has the force and application of an interjection, and has sufficient of the ore rotundo to appear a classical dissyllable; its origin is, however, simply the contract of, as I know, and it is usually preceeded in Somersetshire by no. Thus, ool er do it? no, zino! I thawt a oodn. Will he do it? no, as I know! I thought he would not. These words, Twordn, Wordn, and Zino, may be thus exemplified:

CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS.

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

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

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

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

If the contradictions be supplied they will stand thus:—

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

CLIFTON, Jan. 30, 1825

Sir:

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

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

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

Although I am a native of Somersetshire, I have resided very little in that county since my childhood, and, in my occasional visits since, have had little intercourse with the aborigines. I recollect, however, two or three words, which you might not, perhaps, have met with. One of them of which I have traditionary knowledge, being, I believe, now quite obsolete. Pitisanquint was used in reply to an inquiry after the health of a person, and was, I understand, equivalent to pretty well, or so so. The word Lamiger, which signifies an invalid, I have no doubt you have met with. When any one forbodes bad weather, or any disaster, it is very common to say Don’t ye housenee. Here you have the verbal termination, which you remarked was so common in the West, and which I cannot help thinking might have been originally vised as a sort of diminutive, and that to milkee, signified to milk a little.

As my knowledge of these few words is merely oral, I cannot answer for the orthography; I have endeavoured to go as near the sound as possible, and I only wish it were in my power to make some communication more worth your attention. As it is, I have only my best wishes to offer for the success of your truly original work.

I am, Sir, your most obedient,

Elizabeth Ham.

I have only one or two remarks to add to those of Miss Ham in the preceding letter.

It will be seen, by reference to the exemplifications of the dialect, that occasional pleonasm will be found in it, as well as, very often, extraordinary contraction. I have adone, I have a had, are examples of the first; and ‘tword’n, gup, g’under, banehond, &c. [see Banehond in the Glossary] are examples of the last. Pitisanquint appears to me to be simply a contracted and corrupted mode of expressing Piteous and quaint, [See Pitis in the Glossary.]

Don’t ye houseenee is Do not stay in your houses. But the implied meaning is, be active; do your best to provide for the bad weather which portends. In Somersetshire, most of the colloquial and idiomatic expressions have more or less relation to agriculture, agricultural occupations, or to the most common concerns of life, hence such expressions have, in process of time, become figurative. Thus, don’t ye housenee, would be readily applied to rouse a person to activity, in order that he may prevent or obviate any approaching or portending evil.

I am still of opinion; indeed I may say, I am quite sure, that the verbal terminations, sewy, Tcnitty, &c., have no relation to diminution in the district East of the Parret.

Upon the whole, it is evident that considerable care and circumspection are necessary in committing to paper the signs of the sounds of a language, of which we have no accredited examples, nor established criterion. In making collections of this work, I have not failed to bear this constantly in