Quotes4study

6:14. And I will stretch forth my hand upon them: and I will make the land desolate, and abandoned from the desert of Deblatha in all their dwelling places: and they shall know that I am the Lord.

THE PROPHECY OF EZECHIEL     OLD TESTAMENT

No residents were left in Moscow, and the soldiers--like water percolating through sand--spread irresistibly through the city in all directions from the Kremlin into which they had first marched. The cavalry, on entering a merchant's house that had been abandoned and finding there stabling more than sufficient for their horses, went on, all the same, to the next house which seemed to them better. Many of them appropriated several houses, chalked their names on them, and quarreled and even fought with other companies for them. Before they had had time to secure quarters the soldiers ran out into the streets to see the city and, hearing that everything had been abandoned, rushed to places where valuables were to be had for the taking. The officers followed to check the soldiers and were involuntarily drawn into doing the same. In Carriage Row carriages had been left in the shops, and generals flocked there to select caleches and coaches for themselves. The few inhabitants who had remained invited commanding officers to their houses, hoping thereby to secure themselves from being plundered. There were masses of wealth and there seemed no end to it. All around the quarters occupied by the French were other regions still unexplored and unoccupied where, they thought, yet greater riches might be found. And Moscow engulfed the army ever deeper and deeper. When water is spilled on dry ground both the dry ground and the water disappear and mud results; and in the same way the entry of the famished army into the rich and deserted city resulted in fires and looting and the destruction of both the army and the wealthy city.

Leo Tolstoy     War and Peace

_Local Prohibition._--The limited form of prohibition known as local veto is much more extensively applied. It is an older plan than state prohibition, having been adopted by the legislature of Indiana in 1832. Georgia followed in the next year, and then other states took it up for several years until the rise of state prohibition in the middle of the century caused it to fall into neglect for a time. But the states which adopted and then abandoned general prohibition fell back on the local form, and a great many others have also adopted it. In 1907 it was in force in over 30 states, including all the most populous and important, with one or two exceptions. But the extent to which it is applied varies very widely and is constantly changing, as different places take it up and drop it again. Some alternate in an almost regular manner every two or three years, or even every year; and periodical oscillations of a general character occur in favour of the plan or against it as the result of organized agitation followed by reaction. The wide discrepancies between the practice of different states are shown by some statistics collected in 1907, when the movement was running favourably to the adoption of no licence. In Tennessee the whole state was under prohibition with the exception of 5 municipalities; Arkansas, 56 out of 75 counties; Florida, 35 out of 46 counties; Mississippi, 56 out of 77 counties; North Carolina, 70 out of 97 counties; Vermont, 3 out of 6 cities and 208 out of 241 towns. These appear to be the most prohibitive states, and they are all of a rural character. At the other end of the scale were Pennsylvania with 1 county and a few towns ("town" in America is generally equivalent to "village" in England); Michigan, 1 county and a few towns; California, parts of 8 or 10 counties. New York had 308 out of 933 towns, Ohio, 480 out of 768 towns, Massachusetts, 19 out of 33 cities and 249 out of 321 towns. At the end of 1909 a strong reaction against the prohibition policy set in, notably in Massachusetts. Entry: THE

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 16, Slice 7 "Liquid Gases" to "Logar"     1910-1911

In 1719, while Prince Elbeuf of the house of Lorraine, in command of the armies of Charles VI., was seeking crushed marble to make plaster for his new villa near Portici, he learned from the peasants that there were in the vicinity some pits from which they not only quarried excellent marble, but had extracted many statues in the course of years (see Jorio, _Notizia degli scavi d' Ercolano_, Naples, 1827). In 1738, while Colonel D. Rocco de Alcubierre was directing the works for the construction of the "Reali Delizie" at Portici, he received orders from Charles IV. (later, Charles III. of Spain) to begin excavations on the spot where it had been reported to the king that the Elbeuf statues had been found. At first it was believed that a temple was being explored, but afterwards the inscriptions proved that the building was a theatre. This discovery excited the greatest commotion among the scholars of all nations; and many of them hastened to Naples to see the marvellous statues of the Balbi and the paintings on the walls. But everything was kept private, as the government wished to reserve to itself the right of illustrating the monuments. First of all Monsignor Bayardi was brought from Rome and commissioned to write about the antiquities which were being collected in the museum at Portici under the care of Camillo Paderni, and when it was recognized that the prelate had not sufficient learning, and by the progress of the excavations other most abundant material was accumulated, about which at once scholars and courtiers were anxious to be informed, Bernardo Tanucci, having become secretary of state in 1755, founded the Accademia Ercolanese, which published the principal works on Herculaneum (_Le Pitture ed i bronzi d' Ercolano_, 8 vols., 1757, 1792; _Dissertations isagogicae ad Herculanensium voluminum explanationem pars prima_, 1797). The criterion which guided the studies of the academicians was far from being worthy of unqualified praise, and consequently their work did not always meet the approval of the best scholars who had the opportunity of seeing the monuments. Among these was Winckelmann, who in his letters gave ample notices of the excavations and the antiquities which he was able to visit on several occasions. Other notices were furnished by Gori, _Symbolae litterariae Florentinae_ (1748, 1751), by Marcello Venuti, _Descrizione delle prime scoperte d' Ercolano_ (Rome, 1748), and Scipione Maffei, _Tre lettere intorno alle scoperte d' Ercolano_ (Verona, 1748). The excavations, which continued for more than forty years (1738-1780), were executed at first under the immediate direction of Alcubierre (1738-1741), and then with the assistance of the engineers Rorro and Bardet (1741-1745), Carl Weber (1750-1764), and Francesco La Vega. After the death of Alcubierre (1780) the last-named was appointed director-in-chief of the excavations; but from that time the investigations at Herculaneum were intermitted, and the researches at Pompeii were vigorously carried on. Resumed in 1827, the excavations at Herculaneum were shortly after suspended, nor were the new attempts made in 1866 with the money bestowed by King Victor Emmanuel attended with success, being impeded by the many dangers arising from the houses built overhead. The meagreness of the results obtained by the occasional works executed in the last century, and the fact that the investigators were unfortunate enough to strike upon places already explored, gave rise to the opinion that the whole area of the city had been crossed by tunnels in the time of Charles III. and in the beginning of the reign of Ferdinand IV. And although it is recognized that the works had not been prosecuted with the caution that they required, yet in view of the serious difficulties that would attend the collection of the little that had been left by the first excavators, every proposal for new investigations has been abandoned. But in a memoir which Professor Barnabei read in the Reale Accademia dei Lincei (_Atti della R. Ac._ series iii. vol. ii. p. 751) he undertook to prove that the researches made by the government in the 18th century did not cover any great area. The antiquities excavated at Herculaneum in that century (i.e. the 18th) form a collection of the highest scientific and artistic value. They come partly from the buildings of the ancient city (theatre, basilica, houses and forum), and partly from the private villa of a great Roman family (cf. Comparetti and de Petra, _La Villa Ercolanese dei Pisoni_, Turin, 1883). From the city come, among many other marble statues, the two equestrian statues of the Balbi (_Museo Borbonico_, vol. ii. pl. xxxviii.-xxxix.), and the great imperial and municipal bronze statues. Mural paintings of extraordinary beauty were also discovered here, such as those that represent Theseus after the slaughter of the Minotaur (Helbig, _Wandgemälde_, Leipzig, 1878, No. 1214), Chiron teaching Achilles the art of playing on the lyre (ibid. No. 1291), and Hercules finding Telephus who is being suckled by the hind (ibid. No. 1143). Entry: HERCULANEUM

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 13, Slice 3 "Helmont, Jean" to "Hernosand"     1910-1911

CHILEAN CIVIL WAR (1891). The Chilean civil war grew out of political dissensions between the president of Chile, J.M. Balmaceda, and his congress (see CHILE: _History_), and began in January 1891. On the 6th, at Valparaiso, the political leaders of the Congressional party went on board the ironclad "Blanco Encalada," and Captain Jorje Montt of that vessel hoisted a broad pennant as commodore of the Congressional fleet. Preparations had long been made for the naval _pronunciamento_, and in the end but few vessels of the Chilean navy adhered to the cause of the "dictator" Balmaceda. But amongst these were two new and fast torpedo gunboats, "Almirante Condell" and "Almirante Lynch," and in European dockyards (incomplete) lay the most powerful vessel of the navy, the "Arturo Prat," and two fast cruisers. If these were secured by the Balmacedists the naval supremacy of the congress would be seriously challenged. For the present, and without prejudice to the future, command of the sea was held by Montt's squadron (January). The rank and file of the army remained faithful to the executive, and thus in the early part of the war the "Gobernistas," speaking broadly, possessed an army without a fleet, the congress a fleet without an army. Balmaceda hoped to create a navy; the congress took steps to recruit an army by taking its sympathizers on board the fleet. The first shot was fired, on the 16th of January, by the "Blanco" at the Valparaiso batteries, and landing parties from the warships engaged small parties of government troops at various places during January and February. The dictator's principal forces were stationed in and about Iquique, Coquirabo, Valparaiso, Santiago and Concepción. The troops at Iquique and Coquimbo were necessarily isolated from the rest and from each other, and military operations began, as in the campaign of 1879 in this quarter, with a naval descent upon Pisagua followed by an advance inland to Dolores. The Congressional forces failed at first to make good their footing (16th-23rd of January), but, though defeated in two or three actions, they brought off many recruits and a quantity of munitions of war. On the 26th they retook Pisagua, and on the 15th of February the Balmacedist commander, Eulojio Robles, who offered battle in the expectation of receiving reinforcements from Tacna, was completely defeated on the old battlefield of San Francisco. Robles fell back along the railway, called up troops from Iquique, and beat the invaders at Haura on the 17th, but Iquique in the meanwhile fell to the Congressional fleet on the 16th. The Pisagua line of operations was at once abandoned, and the military forces of the congress were moved by sea to Iquique, whence, under the command of Colonel Estanislao Del Canto, they started inland. The battle of Pozo Almonte, fought on the 7th of March, was desperately contested, but Del Canto was superior in numbers, and Robles was himself killed and his army dispersed. After this the other Balmacedist troops in the north gave up the struggle. Some were driven into Peru, others into Bolivia, and one column made a laborious retreat from Calama to Santiago, in the course of which it twice crossed the main chain of the Andes. Entry: CHILEAN

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 6, Slice 2 "Chicago, University of" to "Chiton"     1910-1911

(1) Northern French has _tsh_ (written _c_ or _ch_) for Latin _k_ (_c_) and _t_ before palatal vowels, where Central and Southern French have _ts_ (written _c_ or _z_)--North Norman and Picard _chire_ (_ceram_), _brach_ (_brachium_), _plache_ (_plateam_); Parisian, South Norman, &c., _cire_, _braz_, _place_. Before the close of the Early Old French period (12th century) _ts_ loses its initial consonant, and the same happened to _tsh_ a century or two later; with this change the old distinction is maintained--Modern Guernsey and Picard _chire_, Modern Picard _plache_ (in ordinary Modern French spelling); usual French _cire_, _place_. English, having borrowed from North and South Norman (and later Parisian), has instances of both _tsh_ and _s_, the former in comparatively small number--_chisel_ (Modern French _ciseau_ = (?) _caesellum_), _escutcheon_ (_écusson_, _scutionem_); _city_ (_cité_, _civitatem_), _place_. (2) Initial Teutonic _w_ is retained in the north-east and along the north coast; elsewhere, as in the other Romance languages, _g_ was prefixed--Picard, &c., _warde_ (Teutonic _warda_), _werre_ (_werra_); Parisian, &c., _guarde_, _guerre_. In the 12th century the _u_ or _w_ of _gu_ dropped, giving the Modern French _garde_, _guerre_ (with _gu_ = _g_); _w_ remains in Picard and Walloon, but in North Normandy it becomes _v_--Modern Guernsey _vâson_, Walloon _wazon_, Modern French _gazon_ (Teutonic _wason_). English has both forms, sometimes in words originally the same--_wage_ and _gage_ (Modern French _gage_, Teutonic _wadi_); _warden_ and _guardian_ (_gardien_, _warding_). (3) Latin _b_ after accented _a_ in the imperfect of the first conjugation, which becomes _v_ in Eastern French, in Western French further changes to _w_, and forms the diphthong _ou_ with the preceding vowel--Norman _amowe_ (_amabam_), _portout_ (_portabat_); Burgundian _ameve_, _portevet_. _-eve_ is still retained in some places, but generally the imperfect of the first conjugation is assimilated to that of the others--amoit, like _avoit_ (_habebat_). (4) The palatalization of every then existing _k_ and _g_ (hard) when followed by _a_, _i_ or _e_, after having caused the development of _i_ before the _e_ (East French _ei_) derived from _a_ not in position, is abandoned in the north, the consonants returning to ordinary _k_ or _g_, while in the centre and south they are assibilated to _tsh_ or _dzh_--North Norman and Picard _cachier_ (_captiare_), _kier_ (_carum_), _cose_ (_causam_), _eskiver_ (Teutonic _skiuhan_), _wiket_ (Teutonic _wik_+_ittum_), _gal_ (_gallum_), _gardin_ (from Teutonic _gard_); South Norman and Parisian _chacier_, _chier_, _chose_, _eschiver_, _guichet_, _jal_, _jardin_. Probably in the 14th century the initial consonant of _tsh_, _dzh_ disappeared, giving the modern French _chasser_, _jardin_ with _ch_ = _sh_ and _j_ = _zh_; but _tsh_ is retained in Walloon, and _dzh_ in Lorraine. The Northern forms survive--Modern Guernsey _cachier_, _gardìn_; Picard _cacher_, _gardin_. English possesses numerous examples of both forms, sometimes in related words--_catch_ and _chase_; _wicket_, _eschew_; _garden_, _jaundice_ (_jaunisse_, from _galbanum_). (5) For Latin accented _a_ not in position Western French usually has _é_, Eastern French _ei_, both of which take an _i_ before them when a palatal precedes--Norman and Parisian _per_ (_parem_), _oiez_ (_audiatis_); Lorraine _peir_, _oieis_. In the 17th and 18th centuries close _é_ changed to open _è_, except when final or before a silent consonant--_amer_ (_amarum_) now having _è_, _aimer_ (_amare_) retaining _é_. English shows the Western close _é_--_peer_ (Modern French _pair_, Old French _per_), _chief_ (_chef_, _caput_); Middle High German the Eastern _ei_--_lameir_ (Modern French _l'amer_, _l'aimer_, _la mer_ = Latin _mare_). (6) Latin accented _e_ not in position, when it came to be followed in Old French by _i_ unites with this to form _i_ in the Western dialects, while the Eastern have the diphthongs _ei_--Picard, Norman and Parisian _pire_ (_pejor_), _piz_ (_pectus_); Burgundian _peire_, _peiz_. The distinction is still preserved--Modern French _pire_, _pis_; Modern Burgundian _peire_, _pei_. English words show always _i_--_price_ (_prix_, _pretium_) _spite_ (_dépit_, _despectum_). (7) The nasalization of vowels followed by a nasal consonant did not take place simultaneously with all the vowels. _A_ and _e_ before _n_ (guttural _n_, as in _sing_), _ñ_ (palatal _n_), _n_ and _m_ were nasal in the 11th century, such words as _tant_ (_tantum_) and _gent_ (_gentem_) forming in the Alexis assonances to themselves, distinct from the assonances with _a_ and _e_ before non-nasal consonants. In the Roland _umbre_ (_ombre_, _umbram_) and _culchet_ (_couche_, _collocat_), _fier_ (_ferum_) and _chiens_ (_canes_), _dit_ (_dictum_) and _vint_ (_venit_), _ceinte_ (_cinctam_) and _veie_ (_voie_, _viam_), _brun_ (Teutonic _brun_) and _fut_ (_fuit_) assonate freely, though _o_ (_u_) before nasals shows a tendency to separation. The nasalization of _i_ and _u_ (= Modern French _u_) did not take place till the 16th century; and in all cases the loss of the following nasal consonant is quite modern, the older pronunciation of _tant_, _ombre_ being _tãnt_, _õmbr[schwa]_, not as now _tã_, _õbrh_. The nasalization took place whether the nasal consonant was or was not followed by a vowel, _femme_ (_feminam_), _honneur_ (_honorem_) being pronounced with nasal vowels m the first syllable till after the 16th century, as indicated by the doubling of the nasal consonant in the spelling and by the phonetic change (in _femme_ and other words) next to be mentioned. English generally has _au_ (now often reduced to _a_) for Old French _ã_--_vaunt_ (_vanter_, _vanitare_), _tawny_ (_tanné_ (?) Celtic). (8) The assimilation of _[~e]_ (nasal _e_) to _ã_ (nasal _a_) did not begin till the middle of the 11th century, and is not yet universal, in France, though generally a century later. In the Alexis nasal _a_ (as in _tant_) is never confounded with nasal _e_ (as in _gent_) in the assonances, though the copyist (a century later) often writes _a_ for nasal _e_ in unaccented syllables, as in _amfant_ (_enfant_, _infantem_); in the Roland there are several cases of mixture in the assonances, _gent_, for instance, occurring in _ant_ stanzas, _tant_ in _ent_ ones. English has several words with _a_ for _e_ before nasals--_rank_ (_rang_, Old French _renc_, Teutonic _hringa_), _pansy_ (_pensée_, _pensatam_); but the majority show _e_--_enter_ (_entrer_, _intrare_), _fleam_ (_flamme_, Old French _fleme_, _phlebotomum_). The distinction is still preserved in the Norman of Guernsey, where _an_ and _en_, though both nasal, have different sounds--_lànchier_ (_lancer_, _lanceare_), but _mèntrie_ (Old French _menterie_, from _mentiri_). (9) The loss of _s_, or rather _z_, before voiced consonants began early, _s_ being often omitted or wrongly inserted in 12th century MSS.--Earliest Old French _masle_ (_masculum_), _sisdre_ (_siceram_); Modern French _mâle_, _cidre_. In English it has everywhere disappeared--_male_, _cider_; except in two words, where it appears, as occasionally in Old French, as _d_--_meddle_ (_mêler_, _misculare_), _medlar_ (_néflier_, Old French also _meslier_, _mespilarium_). The loss of _s_ before voiceless consonants (except _f_) is about two centuries later, and it is not universal even in Parisian--Early Old French _feste_ (_festam_), _escuier_ (_scutarium_); Modern French _fête_, _écuyer_, but _espérer_ (_sperare_). In the north-east _s_ before _t_ is still retained--Walloon _chestai_ (_château_, _castellum_), _fiess_ (_fête_). English shows _s_ regularly--_feast_, _esquire_. (10) Medial _dh_ (soft _th_, as in _then_), and final _th_ from Latin _t_ or _d_ between vowels, do not begin to disappear till the latter half of the 11th century. In native French MSS. _dh_ is generally written _d_, and _th_ written _t_; but the German scribe of the Oaths writes _adjudha_ (_adjutam_), _cadhuna_ (Greek _katá_ and _unam_); and the English one of the Alexis _cuntretha_ (_contratam_), _lothet_ (_laudatum_), and that of the Cambridge Psalter _heriteth_ (_hereditatem_). Medial _dh_ often drops even in the last-named MSS., and soon disappears; the same is true for final _th_ in Western French--Modern French _contrée_, _loué_. But in Eastern French final _th_, to which Latin _t_ between vowels had probably been reduced through _d_ and _dh_, appears in the 12th century and later as _t_, rhyming on ordinary French final _t_--Picard and Burgundian _pechiet_ (_peccatum_) _apeleit_ (_appellatum_). In Western French some final _ths_ were saved by being changed to _f_--Modern French _soif_ (_sitim_), _moeuf_ (obsolete, _modum_). English has one or two instances of final _th_, none of medial _dh_--_faith_ (_foi_, _fidem_); Middle English _cariteþ_ (_charité_, _caritatem_), _drutð_ (Old French _dru_, Teutonic _drud_); generally the consonant is lost--_country_, _charity_. Middle High German shows the Eastern French final consonant--_moraliteit_ (_moralité_, _moralitatem_). (11) _T_ from Latin final _t_, if in an Old French unaccented syllable, begins to disappear in the Roland, where sometimes _aimet_ (_amat_), sometimes _aime_, is required by the metre, and soon drops in all dialects. The Modern French _t_ of _aime-t-il_ and similar forms is an analogical insertion from such forms as _dort-il_ (_dormit_), where the _t_ has always existed. (12) The change of the diphthong _ai_ to _èi_ and afterwards to _èè_ (the doubling indicates length) had not taken place in the earliest French documents, words with _ai_ assonating only on words with _a_; in the Roland such assonances occur, but those of _ai_ on _è_ are more frequent--_faire_ (_facere_) assonating on _parastre_ (_patraster_) and on _estes_ (_estis_); and the MS. (half a century later than the poem) occasionally has _ei_ and _e_ for _ai_--_recleimet_ (_reclamat_), _desfere_ (_disfacere_), the latter agreeing with the Modern French sound. Before nasals (as in _laine_ = _lanam_) and _ié_ (as in _payé_ = _pacatum_), _ai_ remained a diphthong up to the 16th century, being apparently _ei_, whose fate in this situation it has followed. English shows _ai_ regularly before nasals and when final, and in a few other words--_vain_ (_vain_, _vanum_), _pay_ (_payer_, _pacare_), _wait_ (_guetter_, Teutonic _wahten_); but before most consonants it has usually _èè_--_peace_ (_pais_, _pacum_), _feat_ (_fait_, _factum_). (13) The loss or transposition of _i_ (= y-consonant) following the consonant ending an accented syllable begins in the 12th century--Early Old French _glorie_ (_gloriam_), _estudie_ (_studium_), _olie_ (_oleum_); Modern French _gloire_, _étude_, _huile_. English sometimes shows the earlier form--_glory_, _study_; sometimes the later--_dower_ (_douaire_, Early Old French _doarie_, _dotarium_), _oil_ (_huile_). (14) The vocalization of _l_ preceded by a vowel and followed by a consonant becomes frequent at the end of the 12th century; when preceded by open _è_, an _a_ developed before the _l_ while this was a consonant--11th century _salse_ (_salsa_), _beltet_ (_bellitatem_), _solder_ (_solidare_); Modern French _sauce_, _beauté_, _souder_. In Parisian, final _èl_ followed the fate of _èl_ before a consonant, becoming the triphthong _èau_, but in Norman the vocalization did not take place, and the _l_ was afterwards rejected--Modern French _ruisseau_, Modern Guernsey _russé_ (_rivicellum_). English words of French origin sometimes show _l_ before a consonant, but the general form is _u_--_scald_ (_échauder_, _excalidare_), _Walter_ (_Gautier_, Teutonic _Waldhari_); _sauce_, _beauty_, _soder_. Final _èl_ is kept--_veal_ (_veau_, _vitellum_), _seal_ (_sceau_, _sigillum_). (15) In the east and centre _éi_ changes to _òi_, while the older sound is retained in the north-west and west--Norman _estreit_ (_étroit_, _strictum_), _preie_ (_proie_, _praedam_), 12th century Picard, Parisian, &c., _estroit_, _proie_. But the earliest (10th century) specimens of the latter group of dialects have _éi_--_pleier_ (_ployer_, _plicare_) Eulalia, _mettreiet_ (_mettrait_, _mittere habebat_) Jonah. Parisian _òi_, whether from _ei_ or from Old French _òi_, _ói_, became in the 15th century _uè_ (spellings with _oue_ or _oe_ are not uncommon--_mirouer_ for _miroir_, _miratorium_), and in the following, in certain words, _è_, now written _ai_--_français_, _connaître_, from _françois_ (_franceis_, _franciscum_), _conoistre_ (_conuistre_, _cognoscere_); where it did not undergo the latter change it is now _ua_ or _wa_--_roi_ (_rei_, _regem_), _croix_ (_cruis_, _crucem_). Before nasals and palatal _l_, _ei_ (now = _è_) was kept--_veine_ (_vena_), _veille_ (_vigila_), and it everywhere survives unlabialized in Modern Norman--Guernsey _ételle_ (_étoile_, _stella_) with _é_, _ser_ (_soir_, _serum_) with _è_. English shows generally _ei_ (or _ai_) for original _ei_--_strait_ (_estreit_), _prey_ (_preie_); but in several words the later Parisian _oi_--_coy_ (_coi_, _qvietum_), _loyal_ (_loyal_, _legalem_). (16) The splitting of the vowel-sound from accented Latin _o_ or _u_ not in position, represented in Old French by _o_ and _u_ indifferently, into _u_, _o_ (before nasals), and _eu_ (the latter at first a diphthong, now = German _ö_), is unknown to Western French till the 12th century, and is not general in the east. The sound in 11th century Norman was much nearer to _u_ (Modern French _ou_) than to _ó_ (Modern French _ô_), as the words borrowed by English show _uu_ (at first written _u_, afterwards _ou_ or _ow_), never _óó_; but was probably not quite _u_, as Modern Norman shows the same splitting of the sound as Parisian. Examples are--Early Old French _espose_ or _espuse_ (_sponsam_), _nom_ or _num_ (_nomen_), _flor_ or _flur_ (_florem_); Modern French _épouse_, _nom_, _fleur_; Modern Guernsey _goule_ (_gueule_, _gulam_), _nom_, _flleur_. Modern Picard also shows _u_, which is the regular sound before _r_--_flour_; but Modern Burgundian often keeps the original Old French _ó_--_vo_ (_vous_, _vos_). English shows almost always _uu_--_spouse_, _noun_, _flower_ (Early Middle English _spuse_, _nun_, _flur_); but _nephew_ with _éu_ (_neveu_, _nepotem_). (17) The loss of the _u_ (or _w_) of _qu_ dates from the end of the 12th century--Old French _quart_ (_qvartum_), _quitier_ (_qvietare_) with _qu_ = _kw_, Modern French _quart_, _quitter_ with _qu_ = _k_. In Walloon the _w_ is preserved--_couâr_ (_quart_), _cuitter_; as is the case in English--_quart_, _quit_. The _w_ of _gw_ seems to have been lost rather earlier, English having simple _g_--_gage_ (_gage_, older _guage_, Teutonic _wadi_), _guise_ (_guise_, Teutonic _wisa_). (18) The change of the diphthong _òu_ to _uu_ did not take place till after the 12th century, such words as _Anjou_ (_Andegavum_) assonating in the Roland on _fort_ (_fortem_); and did not occur in Picardy, where _òu_ became _au caus_ from older _còus_, _còls_ (_cous_, _collos_) coinciding with _caus_ from _calz_ (_chauds_, _calidos_). English keeps _òu_ distinct from _uu_--_vault_ for _vaut_ (Modern French _voûte_, _volvitam_), _soder_ (_souder_, _solidare_). (19) The change of the diphthong _ié_ to simple _é_ is specially Anglo-Norman, in Old French of the Continent these sounds never rhyme, in that of England they constantly do, and English words show, with rare exceptions, the simple vowel--_fierce_ (Old French _fiers_, _ferus_), chief (_chief_, _caput_), with _ie_ = _ee_; but _pannier_ (_panier_, _panarium_). At the beginning of the modern period, Parisian dropped the _i_ of _ie_ when preceded by _ch_ or _j_--_chef_, _abréger_ (Old French _abregier_, _abbreviare_); elsewhere (except in verbs) _ie_ is retained--_fier_ (_ferum_), _pitié_ (_pietatem_). Modern Guernsey retains _ie_ after _ch_--_ap'rchier_ (_approcher_, _adpropeare_).(20) Some of the Modern French changes have found their places under older ones; those remaining to be noticed are so recent that English examples of the older forms are superfluous. In the 16th century the diphthong _au_ changed to _ao_ and then to _ó_, its present sound, rendering, for instance, _maux_ (Old French _mals_, _malos_) identical with _mots_ (_muttos_). The _au_ of _eau_ underwent the same change, but its _e_ was still sounded as _[schwa]_ (the _e_ of _que_); in the next century this was dropped, making _veaux_ (Old French _vëels_, _vitellos_) identical with _vaux_ (_vals_, _valles_). (21) A more general and very important change began much earlier than the last; this is the loss of many final consonants. In Early Old French every consonant was pronounced as written; by degrees many of them disappeared when followed by another consonant, whether in the same word (in which case they were generally omitted in writing) or in a following one. This was the state of things in the 16th century; those final consonants which are usually silent in Modern French were still sounded, if before a vowel or at the end of a sentence or a line of poetry, but generally not elsewhere. Thus a large number of French words had two forms; the Old French _fort_ appeared as _fòr_ (though still written _fort_) before a consonant, fòrt elsewhere. At a later period final consonants were lost (with certain exceptions) when the word stood at the end of a sentence or of a line of poetry; but they are generally kept when followed by a word beginning with a vowel. (22) A still later change is the general loss of the vowel (written e) of unaccented final syllables; this vowel preserved in the 16th century the sound _[schwa]_, which it had in Early Old French. In later Anglo-Norman final _[schwa]_ (like every other sound) was treated exactly as the same sound in Middle English; that is, it came to be omitted or retained at pleasure, and in the 15th century disappeared. In Old French the loss of final _[schwa]_ is confined to a few words and forms; the 10th century _saveiet_ (_sapebat_ for _sapiebat_) became in the 11th _saveit_, and _ore_ (_ad horam_), _ele_ (_illam_) develop the abbreviated _or, el_. In the 15th century _[schwa]_ before a vowel generally disappears--_mûr_, Old French _mëur_ (_maturum_); and in the 16th, though still written, _[schwa]_ after an unaccented vowel, and in the syllable _ent_ after a vowel, does the same--_vraiment_, Old French _vraiement_ (_veraca mente_); _avoient_ two syllables, as now (_avaient_), in Old French three syllables (as _habebant_). These phenomena occur much earlier in the anglicized French of England--13th century _aveynt_ (Old French _aveient_). But the universal loss of final _e_, which has clipped a syllable from half the French vocabulary, did not take place till the 18th century, after the general loss of final consonants; _fort_ and _forte_, distinguished at the end of a sentence or line in the 16th century as _fòrt_ and _fòrt[schwa]_, remain distinguished, but as _fòr_ and _fòrt_. The metre of poetry is still constructed on the obsolete pronunciation, which is even revived in singing; "dîtes, la jeune belle," actually four syllables (_dit, la zhoen bèl_), is considered as seven, fitted with music accordingly, and sung to fit the music (_dit[schwa], la zhoena bèl[schwa]_). (23) In Old French, as in the other Romanic languages, the stress (force, accent) is on the syllable which was accented in Latin; compare the treatment of the accented and unaccented vowels in _latro amas_, giving _lére, áime_, and in _latronem, amatis_, giving _larón, améz_, the accented vowels being those which rhyme or assonate. At present, stress in French is much less marked than in English, German or Italian, and is to a certain extent variable; which is partly the reason why most native French scholars find no difficulty in maintaining that the stress in living Modern French is on the same syllable as in Old French. The fact that stress in the French of to-day is independent of length (quantity) and pitch (tone) largely aids the confusion; for though the final and originally accented syllable (not counting the silent e as a syllable) is now generally pronounced with less force, it very often has a long vowel with raised pitch. In actual pronunciation the chief stress is usually on the first syllable (counting according to the sounds, not the spelling), but in many polysyllables it is on the last but one; thus in _caution_ the accented (strong) syllable cau, in _occasion_ it is _ca_. Poetry is still written according to the original place of the stress; the rhyme-syllables of _larron, aimez_ are still _ron_ and _mez_, which when set to music receive an accented (strong) note, and are sung accordingly, though in speech the la and ai generally have the principal stress. In reading poetry, as distinguished from singing, the modern pronunciation is used, both as to the loss of the final _[schwa]_ and the displacement of the stress, the result being that the theoretical metre in which the poetry is written disappears. (24) In certain cases accented vowels were lengthened in Old French, as before a lost s; this was indicated in the 16th century by a circumflex--_bête_, Old French _beste_ (_bestiam_), _âme_, Old French _anme_ (_anima_). The same occurred in the plural of many nouns, where a consonant was lost before the _s_ of the flection; thus singular _coc_ with short vowel, plural _cos_ with long. The plural _cos_, though spelt _cogs_ instead of _cô_ (= _kóó_), is still sometimes to be heard, but, like other similar ones, is generally refashioned after the singular, becoming _kòk_. In present French, except where a difference of quality has resulted, as in _côte_ (Old French _coste, costam_) with _ò_ and _cotte_ (Old French _cote_), with _ò_, short and long vowels generally run together, quantity being now variable and uncertain; but at the beginning of this century the Early Modern distinctions appear to have been generally preserved. Entry: 1

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, Volume 11, Slice 1 "Franciscans" to "French Language"     1910-1911

Index: