Page:Alexander and Dindimus (Skeat 1878).djvu/33

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
ROXBURGHE CLUB EDITION.
xxv

Jandewin (?), 659. Karre, to turn, 886 [read 986]. Laike, to play, 465/ Licham, the body, 492 [read 592]. Lileth (?), 474. Lin, to remain, 441, 448. Lisse, to please, 476. Lite, to mock (?), 732 [read 932]. Lose, praise, 221. Lud, a man, 205, 645. Ludene, human, 773. Menskliche, honorably, 1073. Minegeth, mentions, 573, 614. Muniȝe, to teach, 514. Namecouthe, celebrated, 823, 979. Norcheth, paineth not, 769. Quedfulle, full of wickedness, 541. Reke, extended, 594. Sake, contention, 388. Schalk, a man, 432. Sichus, sighs, 1115. Side, long, wide, 481. Skurus, tempests, 478. Snelle, keen, 437. Solow, a ploughshare, 295. Sote, sweet, 128, 496. Spousebreche, adultery, 885. Tacchus, manners, 463. Taried harmed, 132. Tendeth, inflameth, 684. Tenful, sorrowful, 793. Traie, difficult, 710. Whon, a quantity, 353. Wikke, wicked, 537. Wilnede, desired, 150. Won, abundance, 499, 557, 575, 678, 891, 957. Wond, to depart from, 886, 957, 990. Y, an egg, 769.

In the references given here three corrections must be made; karre occurs in l. 986; licham in l. 592; and lite in l. 932; as noted above. And teh explanations may, I think, be impreoved in at least 13 instances. Dreche = to afflict. Jandewin should rather be jaudewin; see my Glossary. Laik in l. 465 is a sb., not a verb. For lileth (the MS. reading) read liketh. Lisse is a sb. signifying joy. Lite means 'little;' ille can lite = knows little ill; or, more strictly, knows evil (but a) little. Ludene is not an adj., but the genitive plural. Norcheth = nourishes. Sake is simply sake. Skurus is an error for skiuus = skius, skies. Traie is a sb., meaning 'a vexation.' Wond is rather 'to shun, avoid.' Y is due to an error; the word is any. The explanation of reke is, besides, hardly satisfactory; if 'extended' be meant, the form should have been rauht or rauȝt.

On the dialect of the poem

§ 22. One difficulty in the way of studying the dialect of an old poem is that, when it presents mixed forms, we cannot well tell whether some of its peculiarities may not have been due merely to the scribe. We want to know which forms are original and which have crept into the poem in course of transcription. Singularly enough, we have in the present instance a short sentence by the