Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T09:24:44.408Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The impact of Horae Subsecivae on the EDD's coverage of western words

The contribution of an unpublished glossary to our knowledge of historical lexical variation in some western dialects

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 February 2021

Javier Ruano–García Open the ORCID record for Javier Ruano–García [Opens in a new window]
Javier Ruano–García*
Affiliation:
Universidad de Salamanca, English Philology, C/ Placentinos, 18, Salamanca, 37008, Spain
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This paper examines the contribution of Horae Subsecivae to Joseph Wright's (1855–1930) English Dialect Dictionary (1896–1905) (EDD). Horae Subsecivae (‘spare hours’) is an obscure manuscript glossary that was possibly compiled by Robert Wight of Wotton-under-Edge in c.1777–78, and is now preserved amongst Wright's papers at the Bodleian Library as Bodl. MS Eng. lang. d. 66. Even though it has received little scholarly attention, Horae Subsecivae has a substantial dialect element, with a large number of words cited from Devonshire, Dorset, Cornwall, Gloucestershire, Somerset, Wiltshire and Worcestershire. The manuscript went largely unnoticed by 18th- and 19th-century collections, and remains virtually unknown today perhaps owing to its extensive use of Latin, but it drew the attention of Joseph Wright, who employed it frequently to represent some western dialects. Drawing on the electronic version of the EDD (EDD Online; Markus, 2019a), the paper is situated within forensic dictionary analysis (Coleman & Ogilvie, 2009), which ‘uses evidence-based methodologies to interrogate the dictionaries themselves about decision-making processes involved in their compilation’ (1). In this framework, I combine archival material with quantitative and qualitative approaches to the data retrieved from EDD Online in order to ascertain the proportion of words that are cited from the manuscript, and to assess the treatment they are given. Attention is paid to their function in the context of the dictionary, labels, the western dialects about which the manuscript provides more extensive information, as well as the entries in which it is cited as the only source for words, ascriptions and senses. This paper highlights the outstanding contribution of Horae Subsecivae to the EDD, while stressing that it notably improves our knowledge of lexical variation in the dialects of the South West and the lower West Midlands. They can only benefit from further inspection as they ‘are neither as easily found nor as well researched as those of the north’ (Melchers, 2010: 82).

Type
Research Article
Information
English Today , Volume 38 , Issue 4 , December 2022 , pp. 213 - 222
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beal, J. C. 2010. ‘The contribution of the Rev. Joseph Hunter's Hallamshire Glossary (1829) to Wright's English Dialect Dictionary.’ In Markus, M., Upton, C. & Heuberger, R. (eds.), Joseph Wright's English Dialect Dictionary and Beyond. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 39–48.Google Scholar
Coleman, J. & Ogilvie, S. 2009. ‘Forensic dictionary analysis: Principles and practice.’ International Journal of Lexicography, 22(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, A. J. 1889. The Existing Phonology of English Dialects, Compared with that of West Saxon Speech. NY: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
Grose, F. 1787. A Provincial Glossary with a Collection of Local Proverbs and Popular Superstitions. London: Printed for S. Hooper.Google Scholar
Markus, M. 2009. ‘Joseph Wright's English Dialect Dictionary and its sources.’ In van Ostade, I. Tieken–Boon & van der Wurff, W. (eds.), Current Issues in Late Modern English. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. 263–82.Google Scholar
Markus, M. 2017. ‘The survival of Shakespeare's language in English dialects (on the basis of EDD Online).’ English Studies, 98(8), 881–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markus, M. (ed.) 2019a. EDD Online 3.0. Online at <http://eddonline-proj.uibk.ac.at/ edd/termsOfUse.jsp> (Accessed May 20, 2020).+(Accessed+May+20,+2020).>Google Scholar
Markus, M. 2019b. ‘The use of EDD Online 3.0. A short guide.’ Online at <http://eddonline-proj.uibk.ac.at/edd/download/eddonline_guide.pdf> (Accessed May 20, 2020).+(Accessed+May+20,+2020).>Google Scholar
Markus, M. 2019c. ‘The supplement to the English Dialect Dictionary: Its structure and value as part of EDD Online.’ International Journal of Lexicography, 32(1), 58–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markus, M. & Heuberger, R. 2007. ‘The architecture of Joseph Wright's English Dialect Dictionary: Preparing the computerised version.’ International Journal of Lexicography, 20(4), 355–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, W. H. 1789. ‘Provincialisms of the Vale of Glocester.’ In Skeat, W. W.. (ed.), Reprinted Glossaries I. London: Published for the English Dialect Society by Trübner, 55–60.Google Scholar
Marshall, W. H. 1796. ‘Provincialisms of West Devonshire’. In Skeat, W. W.. (ed.), Reprinted Glossaries I. London: Published for the English Dialect Society by Trübner, 69–75.Google Scholar
Melchers, G. 2010. ‘Southern English in writing.’ In Hickey, R. (ed.), Varieties of English in Writing: The Written Word as Linguistic Evidence. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 81–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milful, I. & Couper, S. 2010. ‘Sourcing Wright: Problems and solutions in the use of EDD citations for the purposes of OED3.’ In Markus, M., Upton, C. & Heuberger, R. (eds.), Joseph Wright's English Dialect Dictionary and Beyond. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 219–237.Google Scholar
Orton, H. et al. (eds.) 1962–1971. Survey of English Dialects. 4 Vols. Leeds: E.J. Arnold.Google Scholar
Penhallurick, R. 2009. ‘Dialect dictionaries.’ In Cowie, A. P. (ed.), The Oxford History of English Lexicography. Vol. II: Specialized Dictionaries. Oxford: University Press, 290–313.Google Scholar
Ray, J. 1674. A Collection of English Words not Generally Used. London: Printed by H. Bruges for T. Burrell.Google Scholar
Ray, J. 1691. A Collection of English Words not Generally Used (2nd edn.) London: Christopher Wilkinson.Google Scholar
Ruano–García, J. 2014. ‘Cumbrian lexis in the English Dialect Dictionary: William Nicolson's Glossarium Brigantinum (1677) in focus.’ Dictionaries, 35, 162–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruano–García, J. forthcoming. ‘Horae Subsecivae, “that remarkable glossary of West Country words” (Bodl. MS Eng. lang. d. 66).’ International Journal of Lexicography.Google Scholar
Russell, L. R. 2018. Women and Dictionary Making: Gender, Genre, and English Language Lexicography. Cambridge: University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, Norman. 1987. ‘G. M. Hopkins's contribution to the English Dialect Dictionary.’ English Studies, 4, 325–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wight, R. 1777–78. Horae Subsecivae. Bodl. MS Eng. lang. d. 66.Google Scholar
Wright, J. (ed.) 1896–1905. The English Dialect Dictionary. 6 Vols. Oxford: Henry Frowde.Google Scholar