part of the possessive, participial, or superlative ending, may be slurred, as:

And so riveted with faith unto your flesh.—V. i. 167. (Pronounced rivet'.)

Expansion. The number of syllables may be increased by prolonging or trilling the liquids r and 7, especially in monosyllables, as:

I'll watch as long for you then. Approach.— II. vi. 24.

And so though yours not yours. Prove it so. -III. ii. 20.

Often two successive consonants may be separated in pronunciation by a vowel which has disappeared in the spelling, as:

Be valued 'gainst your wife's commandment.-IV. i. 452.

(Pronounced commandement.)

Successive vowels which we regard as diphthongs are often separated, as:

Your mind is tossing on the oce-an.-I. i. 8.

I hate him for he is a Christi-an.-I. iii. 43.

To woo a maid in way of marri-age.-II. ix. 13.

W and y before a vowel are often resolved into syllables, as:

Twelve tw-elve.

Accent. It will be noticed that the accent of words varies somewhat from modern usage. Sometimes the accent is thrown forward toward the end of the word, as:

And other of such vinegar aspect.-I. i. 54.

I tell thee, lady, this aspect of mine.—II. i. 8. His rigorous course; but since he stands obdurate.IV. i. 8.

Sometimes the accent is thrown back toward the beginning, especially in a dissyllabic adjective which precedes a noun accented on the first syllable, as:

To offend, and judge, are distinct offices.-II. ix. 61.

To rib her cerecloth in the obscure grave.—II. vii. 51.

In both these cases, however, it is possible to read the words with an undetermined or "hovering" accent.

2. LANGUAGE

The difficulties in the way of an intelligent reading of Shakspere which connect themselves with his language may be attributed partly to differences between the English usage of his day and that of ours; partly to the dramatic form; and

partly to his own nature and practice as a poet. First, it is to be recognized that many words used by the Elizabethans have disappeared, or have gone out of use in certain constructions, or have acquired or lost intensity and color. Mr. Abbott (Grammar, p. 12) notes that many words, especially those of Latin derivation, which we use metaphorically, Shakspere used literally, in a sense close to the original. Some examples of this are prevented, I. i. 61, mortifying, I. i. 82, and continent, III. ii. 130. Further cases are noted

in the glossary. Here it is sufficient to point out that some perception of the meaning and value of a word to an Elizabethan is necessary in order to enjoy Shakspere. Again, in constructions the Elizabethans "preferred clearness to grammatical correctness, and brevity to both. Hence it was common to place words in the order in which they came uppermost to the mind without much regard to syntax." This tendency was emphasized in Shakspere's case by the fact that he wrote as a dramatist, putting words into the mouths of characters who availed themselves of the short-cuts of conversation as we do today. Moreover, the dramatist, especially if the play is rehearsed by him, can leave much of his meaning to be expressed by the actor. In reading the text of Shakspere we must remember that we are in possession of but one of the means of communication of which a writer for the stage is more or less conscious as

he writes. Naturally, many passages seem to us incomplete. Finally, Shakspere wrote as a poet in an age of poetry-an age when men were really interested in verbal phenomena and when a writer could count upon enthusiastic appreciation for a brilliant figure of speech or a pregnant phrase. In reading him, therefore, we must cultivate a certain alertness of mind or else fail to respond to the demands of some of the greatest and best English poetry.

A few of the many cases of unfamiliar construction are here classified for reference:

I. Prepositions. Shakspere used prepositions with fewer restrictions as to idiom than we admit today. For example, by is used for about in I. ii. 59, and for for in II. ix. 26; from is used for away from in III. ii. 192; of is used for from in IV. i. 422; for with in II. iv. 24; for concerning, IV. i. 403; for for, II. v. 37; for on, I. i. 186. Prepositions are frequently omitted after verbs which today require them, as in I. i. 126; II. i. 16; III. i. 58; III. i. 114; III. ii. 29; V. i. 103; and also in relative clauses, e. g.:

With that keen appetite that he sits down.—II. vi. 9.

See also III. ii. 292.

II. Pronouns. In Shakspere the possessive pronouns may act as antecedents for relatives, as:

Or half her worthiness that gave the ring.-V. i. 198.

A special use of me, thee, him, etc., as ethical datives where we use for me, on his account, etc., (or else omit the word entirely) is to be noted, e. g.:

Seal me there your single bond.-I. iii. 141.

Give me your present to one Master Bassanio.-II. ii. 118.

We have not spoke us yet of torch-bearers.-II. iv. 5.

The relative pronoun is often omitted (e. g., I. i. 176) where we should expect it, and sometimes inserted as a supplementary pronoun, as in IV. i. 134. (See also I. iii. 133.) Who is used indefinitely with as, meaning "as one who." See "As who should say," I. i. 93; I. ii. 50.

III. Verbs. Verbs which we use as intransitive are often transitive in Shakspere, as "feared the valiant," II. i. 9. Shakspere's frequent use of impersonal verbs is to be noted, as in II. viii. 33, "You were best to tell .Antonio," meaning "It would be best for you," etc. The infinitive with to, originally a gerund construction, was used indefinitely in Shakspere's time in cases where we should employ a preposition, by, for, at, etc., and the participle, e. g., "Is sad to think upon," I. i. 40; i. e., “at thinking of"; "Make moan to be abridged," I. i. 127; "To wind about my love," I. i. 155; i. e., "in winding," etc.; "Shame myself to give you this," IV. i. 432.

IV. Adjectives. Schmidt in his Shakespeare Lexicon calls attention to adjectives which do the