A Grammar of Shakespeare's Language [Hardcover]

N. F. Blake (Author)

Book Description

ISBN-10: 0333725905 | ISBN-13: 978-0333725900 | Publication Date: December 7, 2001

Shakespeare's language is a surprisingly neglected topic. An understanding of how his language works is fundamental to appreciating every aspect of his work. This first comprehensive study since the 19th century provides a detailed analysis of the grammar of Shakespeare's language. Steering clear of linguistic jargon, it includes not only traditional features such as the make-up of clauses and differing parts of speech, but also language used in various forms of discourse.

Editorial Reviews

Review

"...a handy tool for all readers of Shakespeare, particularly those who find that a good deal of the editorial commentary generally offered fails to provide the kind of information on language which the reader really needs. One of the assets of this book is that, other than basic notions of traditional grammar, no previous linguistic knowledge is required, since the author provides definitions of linguistic categories and notions whenever possible. A Grammar of Shakespeare's Language doubles as a book to read from cover to cover and as a reference guide to particular language issues in the plays and poems." - Clara Calvo, The European English Messenger

About the Author

N. F. Blake was Chair of English Language at the University of Sheffield until his retirement in 1999. He is currently a Research Professor at De Montfort University, Leicester. He has written on many topics in English Language and his extensive output on Shakespeare includes The Language of Shakespeare.

Product Details

• Hardcover: 432 pages
• Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan (December 7, 2001)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0333725905
• ISBN-13: 978-0333725900
• Product Dimensions: 8.6 x 5.9 x 1.2 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.4 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 5.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (1 customer review)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #3,157,672 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

9 of 9 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars The Best Book on Shakespeare in a Very Long Time, May 11, 2002

By 

Michael J. Connor (Waltham, MA USA) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: A Grammar of Shakespeare's Language (Hardcover)

I am reviewing N. F. Blake's "A Grammar of Shakespeare's Language"

This is the best book about Shakespeare's art in quite a long time. It is so because it focuses on the grammatical norms of Shakespeare's English.

This is a book that adds to our understanding of Shakespeare because it describes in great detail the syntax of the English of Shakespeare's plays and poems. This grammar uses terms from traditional grammar like adjective and adverb, and it also uses terms from functional grammar such as "noun head," "do-periphrasis," and "discourse analysis." A familiarity with the grammars of Quirk, Greenbaum, Svartvik and Leech is not essential but will make Blake's grammar easier to read.

Blake uses the Norton Facsimile (second editition), the Allen and Muir edition of Shakepeare's quarto facsimilies, and 19th Century facsimiles as his sources. It is a bold choice to do so because he wants to demonstrate the features of Shakepeare's grammar with a minimum of editorial interference. But then Blake ties his citations to the line numbering from the Oxford edition because he says this edition was more accessable to the ordinary reader. I confess that I do not find the choice convienent. I would have preferred that he cited the sources that he used directly because it would have been easier to verify his conclusions.

It should be stressed that this book limits itself to the syntax and usage found in Shakespeare plays and poems. It is not a comprehensive grammar of Early Modern English. There are features which show up in Early Modern English which do not show up in Shakespeare's writings. For example, on page 208 Blake writes that "In ShE "not" is never abbrivated to "n't"....which sets it apart from PdE where forms like "don't" are common." "N't" is found in Early Modern English. Though it is true that Shakespeare did not use contractions like "won't," his contempory Thomas Middleton did. See "The Family of Love" (1607) act iv, scene iv, line 49. Gudgeon says to Purge "A pile on ye, won't you! had you not been so manable, here are some would have saved you that labour."

The word "don't" does appear in the 1623 folio, but not as a contraction of "do not" but as a contraction of "done it." See Macbeth act 2, scene 2, line 13 (Norton2 p. 744 col. 2)

But these are minor criticisms. This grammar is authoritative. Shakespeare's readers at all levels will find many things to interest them.