Monday, January 14, 2013

Elizabethan Punctuation

Greetings,

The punctuation of a language assists in its rhythm and therefore how it sounds. These small marks can make all the difference in the meaning of a passage.


Introduction

            Punctuation is how the words are assembled in order to express them. The punctuation determines the flow of the speech and how the language is expressed. Along with grammar, punctuation determines how the language is assembled and then transmitted to others either in writing or in speech. Without punctuation the reader does not know how the language should be read or where emphasis should be placed. The punctuation of the Elizabethan period was different from that of the modern period so it is useful to start with a comparison of the punctuation of both periods and to discover how one became the other.
            The next part of the process is to examine the punctuation marks themselves and see how they were used in the Elizabethan period. For the most part it will be found that they were used in similar if not the same ways. Their entrance into the language and how they were initially used is useful as this will describe much of how the language sounded and the reasons for this.
            The last part of the discussion will examine the influence of printers on the punctuation and how the printers affected the printed word. This is important for the researcher as it will raise some issues with regard to the period word and how it was changed by the printers in the process of their typesetting and printing. Other elements of typesetting associated with punctuation and the presentation of the words will also be discussed.
            The punctuation of a language acts as the signposts for the reader so that they may understand how the language should be read. Changes in punctuation by the printer either from the period or modern can change the meaning of a passage of text greatly, as such it is important to understand the punctuation and how it was used in the period in order to gain the original meaning from the text.

Comparison of Punctuation

            Just as with many parts of the language the foundations for the modern elements can be found in the Renaissance. “The basis of the modern punctuation system emerged during the Renaissance.” (Crystal, 2003:68). This does not mean that they were the same merely that the one was the foundation for the other which results in many areas of similarity between the two. This process was, as with many processes in England at the time, influenced by thought from abroad and especially from Italy. “The modern set of [punctuation] marks slowly emerged during the sixteenth century, with English writers influenced by continental practices.” (Crystal, 2008:65). This is further evidenced by the presence of Italian printers in England at the time whose editorial skills would have come to bear on their work.
            As with the rest of the language, the punctuation at the time was fluid as there was no exact standard which had been established. However, in the case of punctuation, “the basis of English punctuation practices was being established at precisely the time that Shakespeare was writing.” (Crystal, 2008:66). This is one of the reasons that Shakespeare makes such a useful source for language from the period.

“when a punctuation mark is used that is not required by Early Modern English grammar, then it has to be explained, and – once an error in transmission is ruled out – the most likely explanation is that it is there for phonetic purposes.” (Crystal, 2008:69)

            Error in transmission is a subject which will be discussed a little further along in the discussion as they are important. What should be taken from the above at this stage is that the punctuation mark is assumed to be there for phonetic purposes. Thus it is there to make the language sound correctly. This demonstrates an influence which can be found in many of the considerations of the language including orthography and grammar. “During the EModE period, punctuation was essentially rhetorical, reflecting much more closely the pauses and emphases of speech:” (Smith, 2005:127).
            The emphasis on phonetic spelling and punctuation reveals a process which was on-going in the entire language at the time and not just punctuation. The two approaches speaking and reading in which reading eventually dominates (Crystal, 2008:68) reveals an argument as to whether the punctuation should be based on how it is said or how it is read. Due much to the documents being written at the time and the printers reading eventually dominated. What is interesting about this is that the same consideration with regard to the flow of the language was still important, especially for pauses, “one period = two colons = four commas” (Crystal, 2008:67). This set a form of standard as to how the language should be read and thus pronounced also.
            One of the quotes above discusses the presence of marks not required by the language this is an important consideration especially as bare punctuation more common than over-punctuation in the English of the period (Crystal, 2008:70). The reader and researcher both need to take care in examining documents of the period and especially the search for standard forms in the language. These were not as present as they might have been.

“there was a great deal of idiosyncrasy and arbitrariness in their use, and attempts to find a neat correlation between punctuation and prosody in Early Modern English texts have never succeeded.” (Crystal, 2003:68)

            The language at the time was in flux, there were very little standards to go by so writers wrote as they felt was best at the time and to what suited them at the time. Errors of transmission are a very important consideration to be made by the researcher especially as the addition or deletion of punctuation marks in the process of translating the text can change the meaning (Crystal, 2003:68). On example of this is the addition of exclamation marks, which will be discussed further along. The errors in transmission are the reason why in examining the language it is important to find as close to the primary material as possible.

Punctuation Marks


“John Hart … had a great deal to say about both the rhetorical and grammatical functions of ‘pointing’. He distinguished the period (‘point’), colon (‘joint’), comma, question mark (‘asker’), exclamation mark (‘wonderer’), parentheses (‘clozer’), square brackets (‘notes’), apostrophe (‘tourner’), hyphen (‘joiner’), diaeresis (‘sondrer’), and capital (‘great’) letters. His detailed account greatly influenced the way grammarians and printers dealt with this area, and punctuation marks in books came to be more widely used as a result.” (Crystal, 2003:68)

John Hart was one of the influential reformers of the period and one who left his mark on the language. His goal was to standardise the language so that it was used in a more universal way and thus be easier to understand. He was not the only one pursuing this goal, but many of Hart’s determinations with regard to the language can still be found in the modern language. This list is especially useful as it describes those punctuation marks which were present at the time. Something that should be noted is that these marks did not all appear at the same time, but as with the language, developed over time. The punctuation marks presented here are those which have some significance interest to them especially for the researcher.
The apostrophe “arrived in England in the 1550s, and by the time Shakespeare began to write was appearing sporadically in plays.” (Crystal, 2008:83). The fact that the mark was sporadic in plays demonstrates that it took time for the use of the punctuation mark to be accepted. As is known of the mark in the modern language it has at least two purposes, and just as with the mark in general, they took time for acceptance.

“The use of an –s ending to show possession did not develop at the same rate as the use to mark elision [omission]. Most possessives in the original texts have no apostrophe,” (Crystal, 2008:85)

            The apostrophe is a most useful punctuation mark and allowed the language to develop in new and different ways that it otherwise would not have been able to without the mark. The simple addition of possessives allowed for simplification for the reader and the use of it in elision, while used in different forms beforehand, gave clear indication in the language as to what was happening. A similar story is the case with the hyphen.
            The hyphen is one of those marks which has continued to plague theorists from the Early Modern period and well into our own, the use of hyphens was uncertain then as now, but became increasingly common in 1570s (Crystal, 2008:96). There are few clear times when the hyphen is used, and it is used in several other places, this was the same case as in the Elizabethan period. What can clearly be said about the use of the hyphen is that it was used for breaking words at end of line and in compound words same as modern (Crystal, 2008:97). As can be seen the language collected a common use of punctuation marks over time.
            The semi-colon is a mark which was used quite frequently in the language over time, though its most frequent use did not occur until the Elizabethan period, “the semicolon, used with increasing frequency in English texts after about 1580, although its nomenclature remained doubtful for many decades.” (Lass, 1999:29). Just as with the hyphen, the use of the semi-colon was debated by theorists at the time. The presence of the mark is also useful in dating the language by the amount if times it is used. For some time the semi-colon was used in the same way as the colon (Crystal, 2003:68). As it became used more and more over the decades it developed a use of its own, which is found in the modern language.

“The mark [inverted commas] started to appear in English during the 1590s, and increased in frequency throughout the following century, … There is hardly any sign of it in Shakespearean texts” (Crystal, 2008:94)

            Inverted commas, or quotation marks, were used for speech just as they are in the current language. This means that this is one of the marks which attained and kept its use through the changes in language from the Elizabethan to our own. However, it should be noted that this process was slow as can be indicated by its lack of presence in Shakespeare’s works. What is interesting about this is that before the use of such a mark, the reporting verb was in parentheses or followed it with a colon (Crystal, 2008:95). This construction was simplified by the use of the inverted commas.
The question mark is one that was described in form and function by Hart, as indicated above. It was seen as a “point of interrogation” (Crystal, 2008:66) and therefore clearly used when a question was asked either of the reader or when one character asked another. While clear in their use in this particular instance, there was some confusion with this and the exclamation mark.
The exclamation mark was a relatively late introduction to the English language, and had some confusion in the beginning between it and the question mark. Exclamation marks were used in the 1590’s confused with question mark both physically and editorially (Crystal, 2008:72). Physically they look much the same as the question mark. Without the clear printing that is present in the modern world or even more so in the case of handwriting, it would be easy to confuse which was which in the editing process. For the modern researcher it is important to be aware of the presence of exclamation marks in Shakespeare’s works as they are not original, “it is important to know that, when reading such material … all exclamation marks (and indeed dashes too) have been added by the modern editor” (Crystal, 2008:77). In earlier works the case is even truer and thus the researcher needs to be careful. The exclamation mark was a late-comer to the English language and not common at all in the earlier periods.

“their [parentheses] main function is to enclose an observation which makes an extra or subordinate semantic point; if omitted, the rest of the sentence would still stand.” (Crystal, 2008:78)

            The fact that the above refers to the function expressed as their main function is significant. Just as with many words in the English language in the Elizabethan period with regard to use and spelling, many of the marks were also debated as to their correct function. For the most part there was no universal standard for usage of parentheses; for the most part that which they enclosed was for explanatory purposes, or to reduce the emphasis on it (Crystal, 2008:80). So in simple terms parentheses were used to enclose additional information which had little impact upon the surrounding information, topic or grammar.
            The marks which have been discussed here are those which have some significance in the language attributed to them. This is the case even if it is due to their dubious use and explanation. This does not deny the presence of other marks in the language, as there obviously are, but is more focused on those which need some explanation. To this, for the most part those which are absent are those which have the same or very similar functions in the Elizabethan period as they do in the modern.

Typesetting


“Students of Shakespeare’s language need to be aware of the layers of uncertainty surrounding the texts we have available, and understand the bibliographic variables involved,” (Crystal, 2008:40)

            The subject of printers and typesetting would seem to be unrelated to the subject of the language of a culture however it is through such a medium that languages of the Early Modern period became popular and known. With regard to punctuation it is even more important because the editorial decisions of the printers affected how the language was presented and thus understood by others. Some of the changes were simply editorial and others were due to the type. The typesetting and limited by type resulted in altered punctuation in many cases (Crystal, 2008:71).
The issue of typesetting would have been less of an issue if the printers themselves were native speakers however this was not the case. Many came from the continent and their editorial practices were not native. In 1561, printers and grammarians reference to Italians for punctuation (Lass, 1999:21). This led to even more confusion as to how the punctuation should be presented. Thus the presentation of typesetting was somewhat haphazard.
Capitalisation has become standard in the modern language. In the Elizabethan period this was simply not the case. Any noun, verb or adjective could be capitalised (Smith, 2005:127). This was dependent on what the author wished to emphasise at the time. In most cases the patterns of capitalisation in the language followed the description of what was important, but even this was not a set standard. There was great variation in capitalisation of names and “important” words, or due to personification (Crystal, 2008:50). Thus a word could be capitalised in one part of the text and then not in another, depending on the writer and the printer at the time.
Eventually some standardisation did come about even if it was only used for the structure of the language rather than expressing importance or similar ideas. Eventually for the structure of the language a capital follows period, sometimes follows semi-colon or colon especially when expressing break, and capital “i” for pronoun (Crystal, 2008:48ff). These practices of capitalisation were followed for the most part by the printers and became the standards in the language.
Further elements in the printed texts were merely present to save space or to ensure that the ends of the lines were lined up, or justified, space-saving measures used in the text, mostly for typesetting (Crystal, 2008:53). These space-saving measures are more associated with the punctuation than the alphabet due to them being marks, but there are some elements of cross-over in the subject due to the appearance of changes in spelling due to their use. Two examples of this are the use of the tilde and superscript letters.
Omitted letters were marked by the placement of a tilde (~) over letter to show following missing, it was use most commonly with “m” or “n” especially when doubled (Crystal, 2008:56). This technique was designed to shorten a word by a letter in order to fit the word into the line and thus have the line correctly justified at the end. In the case of superscript letters, they were used to shorten common words, “y” with “u” for thou, “t” for that, “e” for the (Crystal, 2008:57). In this case the line could be shortened by several letters depending on how many of the words were present and what was required by the printer at the time. These two are not usually found in the modern language, however other space-saving measures still are.
There are space-saving punctuation marks which are still used, and some which are present on the common keyboard of English-language computers today. Logograms are symbols standing for words, “&” for and, &c for et cetera, or for things which are assumed knowledge (Crystal, 2008:55). The “&” is present on the keyboard and is often used in many different places. For the most part it is used for expedience. Et cetera is for the most part shortened to “etc.” rather than using the logogram present, however the other can still be found. Another common space-saving element which is still present in the modern language which was used in the Elizabethan is that of abbreviations, and now just as then they were used for common things such as titles and money (Crystal:55).
Italics are really a form of print rather than a punctuation mark, just as in the modern language, in the Elizabethan they were used to highlight particular points in the text. In fact in the Elizabethan texts they were used for several things most of which continue on today. Most commonly italics were used for stage directions, titles, foreign words, names for speeches and unfamiliar words (Crystal, 2008:89). As with the modern language the italics were used to highlight something which was important or different which the reader was meant to pay attention to. What should be noted here is that it was the printers who had the real control as to what would be italicised and what would not as this was difficult to express in handwriting.

Conclusion

            Punctuation is like the signposts on the road and gives us directions as to how the language should be read and pronounced. Without such indications the meaning derived from the language can turn out much different and lose its understanding for the reader. It is of little use for the punctuation to be present without rules to guide its use and the reasons for it.
            The punctuation of the Elizabethan was much less organised than that of the present day and this needs to be taken into account. Even with this taken into account the punctuation of that previous period laid the foundations for punctuation in modern English. The reader needs to be aware that even with the similarities in the languages and the punctuation care still needs to be taken in the reading as there are still differences of note which can alter the meaning of the punctuation and thus the language.
            A selection of punctuation marks have been indicated and discussed. The discussion of these select punctuation marks claims neither that they are the most significant nor that they are the only ones. Other punctuation marks were used and used in similar manner as is found in modern texts. The ones which have been discussed are those which demonstrate differences between their presence in Elizabethan language and in the modern. This is significant as they mark both changes in the language and also differences between the modern and the Elizabethan.
            Printers and typesetting seems to be a subject which emerges regardless of which part of the Elizabethan language is discussed. This is simply the case as most of the language which is left for the researcher is in printed form rather than in hand-writing. What needs to be acknowledged here is the impact which the printers had on the use of punctuation and also the significant marks which were added to the language either as space-savers or as marks of significance some of which have travelled through to the modern language and typeset.
            Punctuation is a subject which is significant and cannot be ignored for a complete discussion and understanding of a language where it is present. For the researcher it is significant that while very similar to the punctuation of the present language there are differences which need to be acknowledged and recognised. This discussion has pointed out some points of importance which a researcher needs to take into account in the reading and discussing of the language of the Elizabethan period.

Bibliography

Crystal, D. (2003) The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language (2nd ed), Cambridge University Press, New York, USA

Crystal, D. (2008) ‘Think on my Words’: Exploring Shakespeare’s Language, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

Lass, R. (ed.)(1999) The Cambridge History of the English Language: Volume III: 1476 – 1776, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

Smith, J. (2005) Essentials of Early English, Routledge, New York, USA