Bibliography (a) Editions and facsimiles of Shakespeare’s works Allen, Michael, and Kenneth Muir. (1981) Shakespeare’s Plays in Quarto: A Facsimile of Copies Primarily in the Henry E. Huntington Library (Ber- keley and Los Angeles: University of California Press). Bate, Jonathan. (1995) Titus Andronicus. The Arden Shakespeare 3rd Se- ries (London and New York: Routledge). Bevington, David. (1990) Antony and Cleopatra. The New Cambridge Shakespeare (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). —— (1998) Troilus and Cressida. The Arden Shakespeare 3rd Series (Walton- on-Thames: Thomas Nelson). Booth, Stephen. (1977) Shakespeare’s Sonnets (New Haven, CT, and Lon- don: Yale University Press). Braunmuller, A. R. (1997) Macbeth. The New Cambridge Shakespeare (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Brissenden, Alan. (1993) As You Like It. The Oxford Shakespeare (Ox- ford and New York: Oxford University Press). Brooke, Nicholas. (1990) The Tragedy of Macbeth. The Oxford Shakespeare (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press). Daniell, David. (1998) Julius Caesar. The Arden Shakespeare 3rd Series (Walton-on-Thames: Thomas Nelson). Duncan-Jones, Katherine. (1997) Shakespeare’s Sonnets . The Arden Shakespeare 3rd Series (Walton-on-Thames: Nelson and Sons). Edwards, Philip. (1985) Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. The New Cambridge Shakespeare (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Fraser, Russell. (1985) All’s Well That Ends Well. The New Cambridge Shakespeare (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Furness, H. H. (1877) A New Variorum Edition of Shakespeare. Hamlet Vol- ume 1 (Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott). Griggs, William. (no date) Shakspere’s Venus and Adonis. The First Quarto 1593. Shakspere-Quarto Fac-similes 12 (London: W. Griggs). Hattaway, Michael. (1991) The Second Part of King Henry VI. The New Cambridge Shakespeare (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). Hibbard, G. R. (1987) Hamlet. The Oxford Shakespeare (Oxford: Clarendon Press). Hinman, Charlton. (1996) The Norton Facsimile: The First Folio of Shakespeare. 2nd edn with a new introduction by Peter W. M. Blayney (New York and London: W. W. Norton). Honigmann, E. A. J. (1997) Othello. The Arden Shakespeare 3rd Series (Walton-on-Thames: Thomas Nelson). Jenkins, Harold. (1982) Hamlet. The Arden Shakespeare 2nd Series (London: Methuen). 345
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Bibliography
(a) Editions and facsimiles of Shakespeare’s works
Allen, Michael, and Kenneth Muir. (1981) Shakespeare’s Plays in Quarto:A Facsimile of Copies Primarily in the Henry E. Huntington Library (Ber-keley and Los Angeles: University of California Press).
Bate, Jonathan. (1995) Titus Andronicus. The Arden Shakespeare 3rd Se-ries (London and New York: Routledge).
Bevington, David. (1990) Antony and Cleopatra. The New CambridgeShakespeare (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
—— (1998) Troilus and Cressida. The Arden Shakespeare 3rd Series (Walton-on-Thames: Thomas Nelson).
Booth, Stephen. (1977) Shakespeare’s Sonnets (New Haven, CT, and Lon-don: Yale University Press).
Braunmuller, A. R. (1997) Macbeth. The New Cambridge Shakespeare(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Brissenden, Alan. (1993) As You Like It. The Oxford Shakespeare (Ox-ford and New York: Oxford University Press).
Brooke, Nicholas. (1990) The Tragedy of Macbeth. The Oxford Shakespeare(Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press).
Daniell, David. (1998) Julius Caesar. The Arden Shakespeare 3rd Series(Walton-on-Thames: Thomas Nelson).
Duncan-Jones, Katherine. (1997) Shakespeare’s Sonnets. The ArdenShakespeare 3rd Series (Walton-on-Thames: Nelson and Sons).
Edwards, Philip. (1985) Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. The New CambridgeShakespeare (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Fraser, Russell. (1985) All’s Well That Ends Well. The New CambridgeShakespeare (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Furness, H. H. (1877) A New Variorum Edition of Shakespeare. Hamlet Vol-ume 1 (Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott).
Griggs, William. (no date) Shakspere’s Venus and Adonis. The First Quarto1593. Shakspere-Quarto Fac-similes 12 (London: W. Griggs).
Hattaway, Michael. (1991) The Second Part of King Henry VI. The NewCambridge Shakespeare (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Hibbard, G. R. (1987) Hamlet. The Oxford Shakespeare (Oxford: ClarendonPress).
Hinman, Charlton. (1996) The Norton Facsimile: The First Folio of Shakespeare.2nd edn with a new introduction by Peter W. M. Blayney (New Yorkand London: W. W. Norton).
Honigmann, E. A. J. (1997) Othello. The Arden Shakespeare 3rd Series(Walton-on-Thames: Thomas Nelson).
Jenkins, Harold. (1982) Hamlet. The Arden Shakespeare 2nd Series(London: Methuen).
345
346 Bibliography
Oliver, H. J. (1959) Timon of Athens. The Arden Shakespeare 2nd Series(London: Methuen).
Praetorius, Charles. (no date) Shakspere’s Lucrece: The First Quarto 1594.Shakspere-Quarto Fac-similes 35 (London: C. Praetorius).
Weis, René. (1993) King Lear: A Parallel Text Edition (London and NewYork: Longman).
Wells, Stanley and Gary Taylor. (1988) William Shakespeare The CompleteWorks, Compact Edition (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
(b) Secondary material
Abbott, E. A. (1870) A Shakespearian Grammar: An Attempt to IllustrateSome of the Differences between Elizabethan and Modern English. 3rd edn(London: Macmillan).
Allen, Cynthia. (1995) ‘On doing as you please,’ in Jucker 1995: 275–308.Altenberg, Bengt. (1982) The Genitive v. the of-Construction: A Study of
Syntactic Variation in 17th Century English. Lund Studies in English62 (Lund: Gleerup).
Bækken, Bjørg. (1998) Word Order Patterns in Early Modern English withSpecial Reference to the Position of the Subject and Finite Verb. StudiaAnglistica Norvegica 9 (Oslo: Novus Press).
—— (1999) ‘Periphrastic do in Early Modern English,’ FLH 20: 107–28.—— (2000) ‘Inversion in Early Modern English,’ English Studies 81:
393–421.Baghdikian, Sonia. (1982) ‘A functional perspective of the system of
negation in Early Modern English,’ FLH 3: 153–61.Baldwin, William. (1944) William Shakspere’s Small Latine and Lesse Greeke.
2 vols (Urbana: University of Illinois Press).Bambas, R. C. (1947) ‘Verb forms in -s and -th in Early Modern English,’
Journal of English and Germanic Philology 46: 183–7.Barber, Charles. (1981) ‘“You” and “thou” in Shakespeare’s Richard III,’
Leeds Studies in English n.s. 12: 273–89. [Rptd Salmon and Burness1987: 163–79]
—— (1997) Early Modern English. 2nd edn (Edinburgh: Edinburgh Uni-versity Press).
Biese, Y. M. (1952) ‘Notes on the use of the ingressive auxiliaries in theworks of William Shakespeare,’ Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 53: 9–18.[Rptd Salmon and Burness 1987: 329–38]
Blake, N. F. (1983) Shakespeare’s Language: An Introduction (Basingstoke:Macmillan – now Palgrave). [Rptd as The Language of Shakespeare (1988)]
—— (1987) ‘Levels of language in Shakespeare’s King Henry IV Part I,’in M. Gomez Lara and J. A. Prieto Pablos (eds), Stylistica: I Semana deEstudios Stylisticas (Seville: Alfar), pp. 89–107. [Rptd Blake 1996b: 3–22]
—— (1988) ‘Negation in Shakespeare,’ in Graham Nixon and John Honey(eds), An Historic Tongue: Studies in English Linguistics in Memory ofBarbara Strang (London and New York: Routledge), pp. 89–111. [RptdBlake 1996b: 23–43]
—— (1989) ‘Standardizing Shakespeare’s non-standard language,’ in
Bibliography 347
Joseph B. Trahern Jr (ed.), Standardizing English: Essays in the Historyof Language Change in Honor of John Hurt Fisher. Tennessee Studies inLiterature 31 (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press), pp. 57–81.[Rptd Blake 1996b: 44–65]
—— (1990a) ‘Shakespeare’s language: some recent studies and futuredirections,’ Shakespeare Jahrbuch (West) 61–77. [Rptd Blake 1996b: 66–82]
—— (1990b) ‘Modernizing language and editing Shakespeare,’ Poetica[Tokyo] 34: 101–23. [Rptd Blake 1996b: 83–105]
—— (1991) ‘The language of the quarto and folio texts of King Lear,’ inMichio Kawai (ed.), Language and Style in English Literature: Essays inHonour of Michio Masui (Tokyo: Eihosha for the English ResearchAssociation of Hiroshima), pp. 3–26. [Rptd Blake 1996b: 156–72]
—— (1992a) ‘Early Modern English,’ in Nocera Avila et al. 1992: 13–37.—— (1992b) ‘Shakespeare, discourse and the teaching of English,’ in
R. Ahrens and H. Antor (eds), Text–Culture–Reception: Cross-culturalAspects of English Studies (Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitätsverlag),pp. 431–45. [Rptd Blake 1996b: 106–20]
—— (1992c) ‘Why and What in Shakespeare,’ in Toshiyuki Takamiyaand Richard Beadle (eds), Chaucer to Shakespeare: Essays in Honour ofShinsuke Ando (Cambridge: Brewer), pp. 179–93. [Rptd Blake 1996b:121–38]
—— (1992–3 [1994]) ‘Antony and Cleopatra II.ii.56–58,’ Lore and Language11.2: 223–6.
—— (1993) ‘Do the green sour ringlets make,’ Notes and Queries 238: 201–2.—— (1996a) A History of the English Language (Basingstoke: Macmillan
– now Palgrave).—— (1996b) Essays on Shakespeare’s Language 1st Series (Misterton:
Language Press).—— (1996c) ‘Shakespeare’s language: past achievements and future
directions,’ in Javier Pérez Guerra (ed.), Proceedings of the XIXthInternational Conference of Aedean (Vigo: Universidade de Vigo), pp.21–35.
—— (1996d) ‘Lexical links in Shakespeare,’ Poetica [Tokyo] 45: 79–103.—— (1996e) ‘Holofernes’ lyric in Love’s Labour’s Lost Act IV Scene II,’ in
Stefan Hörlacher and Marion Islinger (eds), Expedition nach der Wahrheit:Essays and Papers in Honour of Theo Stemmler (Heidelberg: Winter),pp. 177–91.
—— (1997) ‘Editing Shakespeare: the role of language studies,’ Euro-pean Journal of English Studies 1: 329–53.
—— (1998) ‘Shakespeare’s Sonnet 69,’ Notes and Queries 243: 355–7.—— (1999a) ‘Studies on Shakespeare’s language: an overview,’ The
Shakespearean International Yearbook 1: 168–86.—— (1999b) ‘Pragmatics and the editing of Shakespeare,’ in Christa
Jansohn (ed.), Problems of Editing. Beihefte of Editio 14 (Tübingen:Niemeyer), pp. 113–26.
—— (1999c) ‘Nonstandard language in early varieties of English,’ inTaavitsainen et al. 1999: 123–50.
348 Bibliography
—— (forthcoming) ‘The study of Shakespeare’s language: its implicationsfor editors, critics and translators,’ in M. F. Garcia-Bermejo Giner, G.Rodríguez Sánchez and F. J. Sánchez Díaz. (eds), Sederi 10 (In Memo-riam Patricia Shaw). Yearbook of the Spanish Association for EnglishRenaissance Studies (Zaragoza: Librería General), pp. 11–30.
Blake, N. F. and Charles Jones (eds). (1984) English Historical Linguis-tics: Studies in Development. CECTAL Conference Papers Series 3(Sheffield: Centre for English Cultural Tradition and Language).
Blank, Paula. (1996) Broken English: Dialects and the Politics of Languagein Renaissance Writing. The Politics of Language (London and NewYork: Routledge).
Bolton, W. F. (1992) Shakespeare’s English: Language in the History Plays.The Language Library (Cambridge, MA, and Oxford: Blackwell).
Booth, Stephen. (1977) ‘Syntax as rhetoric in Richard II,’ Mosaic 18: 87–104.—— (1997) ‘Shakespeare’s language and the language of Shakespeare’s
time,’ SS 50: 1–17.Bowers, Fredson. (1955) On Editing Shakespeare and the Elizabethan Dra-
matists (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Library forRosenbach Foundation).
Brabant, Anja de. (1992) ‘The verb “speak” in Shakespeare’s plays,’ inR. Tracy (ed.), Who Climbs the Grammar-Tree. Linguistische Arbeiten281 (Tübingen: Niemeyer), pp. 33–51.
Bradbrook, Muriel C. (1954) ‘Fifty years of the criticism of Shakespeare’sstyle: a retrospect,’ SS 7: 1–11.
Bradley, Henry. (1916) ‘Shakespeare’s English,’ in C. T. Onions et al.(eds), Shakespeare’s England (Oxford: Clarendon Press), vol. 2: 539–74.
Breur, Horst. (1983) ‘Titel und Anreden bei Shakespeare und in derShakespearezeit,’ Anglia 101: 49–77.
Brinton, Laurel J. (1988) The Development of English Aspectual Systems:Aspectualizers and Post-verbal Particles. Cambridge Studies in Linguis-tics 49 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
—— (1994) ‘The differentiation of statives and perfects in Early Mod-ern English: the development of the conclusive perfect,’ in Stein andTieken-Boon 1994: 135–70.
—— (1996) Pragmatic Markers in English: Grammaticalization and DiscourseFunctions. Topics in English Linguistics 19 (Berlin and New York: Mou-ton de Gruyter).
Brook, G. L. (1976) The Language of Shakespeare. The Language Library(London: Deutsch).
Brosnahan, L. F. (1961) ‘The apostrophe in the genitive singular in the17th century,’ English Studies 42: 363–9.
Brown, P. and Stephen Levinson. (1987) Politeness: Some Universals inLanguage Usage (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Brown, Roger and Albert Gilman. (1989) ‘Politeness theory andShakespeare’s four major tragedies,’ Language in Society 18: 159–212.
Burchfield, Robert. (1987) ‘The bare infinitive in The Winter’s Tale,’ inBernhard Fabian and Kurt Tetzeli von Rosador (eds), Shakespeare Text,Language, Criticism: Essays in Honour of Marvin Spevack (Olms:Weidmann), pp. 34–56.
Bibliography 349
Burton, Dolores M. (1973) Shakespeare’s Grammatical Style: A Computer-assisted Analysis of Richard II and Antony and Cleopatra (Austin andLondon: University of Texas Press).
Byrne, M. St Clair. (1964) ‘The foundations of Elizabethan language’,SS 17: 223–39.
Calvo, Clara. (1991) Power Relations and Fool-Master Discourse in Shakespeare:A Discourse Stylistics Approach to Dramatic Dialogue. Monographs inSystemic Linguistics 3 (Nottingham: Department of English, Univer-sity of Nottingham).
—— (1992) ‘Pronouns of address and social negotiation in As You LikeIt,’ Language and Literature 1: 5–27.
Candido, Joseph. (1984) ‘The name of the king: Hal’s “titles” in theHenriad,’ Texas Studies in Literature and Language 26: 61–73.
Carroll, William C. (1976) The Great Feast of Language in Love’s Labour’sLost (Princeton, NJ, and Guildford: Princeton University Press).
Castillo, Concha. (1994) ‘Verb-particle combinations in Shakespeare’sEnglish: a syntactic study,’ Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95: 439–51.
Cercignani, Fausto. (1981) Shakespeare’s Works and Elizabethan Pronuncia-tion (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
Charney, Maurice. (1969) Style in Hamlet (Princeton, NJ: Princeton Uni-versity Press; London: Oxford University Press).
Cheshire, Jenny. (1994) ‘Standardization and the English irregular verb,’in Stein and Tieken-Boon 1994: 115–33.
Christophersen, Paul. (1939) The Articles: A Study of their Theory and Use inEnglish (Copenhagen: Munksgård; London: Oxford University Press).
Coates, Richard. (1987) ‘A provincial bibliography on names in the worksof Shakespeare,’ Names 35: 206–23.
Coulthard, Malcolm. (1985) An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. 2ndedn. Applied Linguistics and Language Study (London and New York:Longman).
Culpeper, Jonathan and Merja Kytö. (1999) ‘Investigating nonstandardlanguage in a corpus of Early Modern English dialogues: method-ological considerations and problems,’ in Taavitsainen et al. 1999:171–87.
Cusack, Bridget. (1970) ‘Shakespeare and the tune of the time,’ SS 23:1–12. [Rptd Salmon and Burness 1987: 23–34]
—— (1982) ‘Complements and humours,’ in J. Anderson (ed.), LanguageForm and Linguistic Variation. Papers Dedicated to Angus McIntosh. CurrentIssues in Linguistic Theory 15 (Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: JohnBenjamins), pp. 29–42.
—— (1998) Everyday English 1500–1700. A Reader (Edinburgh: EdinburghUniversity Press).
Dahl, Lisa. (1969) Nominal Style in the Shakespearean Soliloquy (Turku:Turun Yliopisto).
Dahl, Torsten. (1956) Linguistic Studies in Some Elizabethan Writings II,The Auxiliary DO (Copenhagen: Munksgård).
De Grazia, Margreta. (1978) ‘Shakespeare’s view of language: an his-torical perspective,’ Shakespeare Quarterly 29: 374–88. [Rptd Salmonand Burness 1987: 473–87]
350 Bibliography
—— (1991) Shakespeare Verbatim. The Reproduction of Authenticity and the1790 Apparatus (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
Dekeyser, X. (1988) ‘Socio-historical aspects of relativization in late 16thcentury English: ca. 1550–1600,’ Studia Anglia Posnaniensia 21: 25–39.
Dent, R. W. (1981) Shakespeare’s Proverbial Language: An Index (Berkeley,Los Angeles and London: University of California Press).
Dillon, Janette. (1998) Language and Stage in Medieval and RenaissanceEngland (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Donawerth, Jane. (1984) Shakespeare and the Sixteenth-Century Study ofLanguage (Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press).
Doran, Madeleine. (1976) Shakespeare’s Dramatic Language (Madison:University of Wisconsin Press).
Downes, William. (1988) ‘King Lear’s “question” to his daughters,’ inWillie van Peer 1988: 225–57.
Draper, J. W. (1952) ‘The objective genitive and “run-awayes eyes”,’Journal of English and Germanic Philology 51: 580–3.
Eagleson, Robert D. (1971) ‘Propertied as all the tuned spheres: aspectsof Shakespeare’s language,’ The Teaching of English 20: 4–15. [RptdSalmon and Burness 1987: 133–44]
Eaton, Roger, Olga Fischer, Willem Koopman and Frederike van derLeek (eds). (1985) Papers from the 4th International Conference on En-glish Historical Linguistics. Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 41(Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins).
Edwards, P., I.-S. Ewbank and G. K. Hunter (eds). (1980) Shakespeare’sStyles: Essays in Honour of Kenneth Muir (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-versity Press).
Ehlich, Konrad. (1992) ‘On the history of politeness,’ in Richard Wattset al. (eds), Politeness in Language; Studies in its History, Theory andPractice (Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter), pp. 71–107.
Ehrl, Charlotte. (1957) Sprachstil und Charakter bei Shakespeare. Schriftenreiheder Deutschen Shakespeare-Gesellschaft n.f. 6 (Heidelberg: Quelle andMeyer).
Eichler, Albert. (1925–26) ‘“Master” als Höflichkeitswort in ShakespearesDramen,’ Englische Studien 60: 134–9.
Elam, Keir. (1984) Shakespeare’s Universe of Discourse (Cambridge: Cam-bridge University Press).
Ellegård, Alvar. (1953) The Auxiliary Do: the Establishment and Regulationof its Use in English. Gothenburg Studies in English 2 (Stockholm:Almqvist and Wiksell).
Ellis, Herbert A. (1973) Shakespeare’s Lusty Punning in Love’s Labour’sLost (The Hague: Mouton).
Elsness, Johan. (1994) ‘On the progression of the progressive in earlyModern English,’ ICAME Journal 18: 5–25.
Evans, B. Ifor. (1959) The Language of Shakespeare’s Plays (London:Methuen).
Fanego, T. (1990) ‘Finite complement clauses in Shakespeare’s English,’Studia Neophilologica, 62: 3–21 and 129–49.
—— (1991) ‘On the origin and history of the English syntactic type(and) none but he to marry with Nan Page,’ English Studies 72: 513–19.
Bibliography 351
—— (1992) Infinitive Complements in Shakespeare’s English: Synchronic andDiachronic Aspects (Santiago: Universidade de Santiago de Compostela).
—— (1994) ‘Infinitive marking in Early Modern English,’ in F. Fernándezet al. 1994: 191–203.
—— (1996a) ‘The development of gerunds as objects of subject-controlverbs in English (1400–1760),’ Diachronica 13: 29–62.
—— (1996b) ‘On the historical development of English retrospectiveverbs,’ Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 97: 71–9.
—— (1996c) ‘The gerund in Early Modern English: evidence from theHelsinki Corpus,’ FLH 17: 97–152.
—— (1997) ‘On patterns of complementation in verbs of effort,’ EnglishStudies 78: 60–7.
Fernández, Francisco, Miguel Fuster and Juan José Calvo (eds). (1994)English Historical Linguistics 1992. Amsterdam Studies in the Theoryand History of Linguistic Science IV: 113 (Amsterdam and Philadel-phia, PA: John Benjamins).
Finkenstaedt, Thomas. (1963) You und Thou: Studien zur Anrede imEnglischen (mit einem Exkurs über die Anrede im Deutschen). Quellenund Forschungen zur Sprache- und Kulturgeschichte der germanischenVölker, neue Folge 10 (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter).
Fisiak, Jacek (ed.). (1984) Historical Syntax. Trends in Linguistics 23 (Berlin,New York and Amsterdam: Mouton).
Forker, Charles. (1989) ‘Webster or Shakespeare? Style, idiom, vocabu-lary, and spelling in the additions to Sir Thomas More,’ in T. H.Howard-Hill (ed.), Shakespeare and Sir Thomas More. Essays on the Playand its Shakespearian Interest (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press),pp. 151–70.
Frank, T. (1985) ‘The rise of do-support in Modern English: a re-appraisal,’Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 10: 1–29.
Franz, W. (1902) Die Grundzüge der Sprache Shakespeares (Berlin: Felber).—— (1924) Shakespeare-Grammatik. 3rd edn (Heidelberg: C. Winters
Universitätsbuchhandlung).Freeman, Neil. (1994) Shakespeare’s First Texts (Deep Cove, Vancouver:
Folio Scripts).Fridén, Georg. (1948) Studies on the Tenses of the English Verb from Chaucer
to Shakespeare with Special Reference to the Late Sixteenth Century. Essaysand Studies on English Language and Literature 2 (Uppsala: LundequistskaBokhandeln; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press).
Fuami, Shigenobu. (1997) Essays on Shakespeare’s Language: Language,Discourse and Text. Aries Series 11 (Kyoto: Apollon-sha).
Gibinska, Marta. (1987) The Functioning of Language in Shakespeare’s Plays:A Pragma-dramatic Approach (Krakow: Nakladem UniwersytetuJagiellonskiego).
Gilbert, Anthony J. (1997) Shakespeare’s Dramatic Speech. Studies in Re-naissance Literature 15 (Lewiston, Queenston and Lampeter: EdwinMellen Press).
Gillett, P. J. (1974) ‘Me, U, and Non-U: class connotations of twoShakespearean idioms,’ Shakespeare Quarterly 25: 297–309. [Rptd Salmonand Burness 1987: 117–29]
352 Bibliography
Görlach, Manfred. (1988) ‘The study of Early Modern English variation –the Cinderella of English historical linguistics,’ in J. Fisiak (ed.), His-torical Dialectology: Regional and Social (Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter),pp. 211–28.
—— (1991) Introduction to Early Modern English (Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press).
Gordon, George. (1928) Shakespeare’s English. Society for Pure EnglishTract 29 (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
Graband, Gerhard. (1965) Die Entwicklung der frühneuenglischenNominalflexion. Dargestellt vornehmlich auf Grund von Grammatiker-zeugnissen des 17. Jahrhunderts (Tübingen: Niemeyer).
Graham-White, Anthony. (1995) Punctuation and its Dramatic Value inShakespearean Drama (Newark: University of Delaware Press; London:Associated University Presses).
Greenbaum, Sidney. (1988) Good English and the Grammarian. EnglishLanguage Series 17 (London and New York: Longman).
Grice, H. Paul. (1975) ‘Logic and conversation,’ in Peter Cole and JerryMorgan (eds), Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 3 Speech Acts (New York:Academic Press), pp. 41–58.
—— (1981) ‘Presupposition and conversational implicature,’ in Peter Cole(ed.), Radical Pragmatics (New York: Academic Press), pp. 183–98.
Gurr, A. (1982) ‘You and thou in Shakespeare’s sonnets,’ Essays in Criti-cism 32: 9–25.
Henderson, R. A. (1993) ‘Interrogative do in the late 16th and early 17thcenturies,’ in Maurizio Gotti (ed.), English Diachronic Syntax. CollanaBlu 20 (Milan: Guerini), pp. 139–48.
Hinman, Charlton. (1963) The Printing and Proof-Reading of the First Fo-lio of Shakespeare. 2 vols (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
Hirsch, E. D., Jr. (1967) Validity in Interpretation (New Haven, CT, andLondon: Yale University Press).
Holmqvist, Erik. (1922) On the History of the English Present Inflections Particu-larly -th and -s. (Heidelberg: C. Winters Universitätsbuchhandlung).
Honigmann, E. A. J. (1980) ‘Shakespeare’s “bombast”,’ in Edwards,Ewbank and Hunter 1980: 151–62.
—— (1985) Shakespeare: The Lost Years (Manchester: Manchester Univer-sity Press).
Hope, Jonathan. (1993) ‘Second person singular pronouns in records of EarlyModern “spoken” English,’ Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 94: 83–100.
—— (1994) The Authorship of Shakespeare’s Plays (Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press).
—— (1999) ‘Shakespeare’s “native English”,’ in David Scott Kaplan (ed.),A Companion to Shakespeare. Blackwell Companions to Literature andCulture (Oxford and Maiden, MA: Blackwell), pp. 239–55.
Houston, John Porter. (1988) Shakespearean Sentences: A Study in Styleand Syntax (Baton Rouge and London: Louisiana State University Press).
Howard-Hill, T. H. (1996) ‘U and non-U: class and discourse level inOthello,’ in John M. Mucciolo (ed.), Shakepeare’s Universe: RenaissanceIdeas and Conventions: Essays in Honour of W. R. Elton (Aldershot: Scolar),pp. 175–86.
Bibliography 353
Hudson, Kenneth. (1970) ‘Shakespeare’s use of colloquial language,’ SS23: 39–48.
Hulme, Hilda M. (1962) Explorations in Shakespeare’s Language: Some Prob-lems of Word Meaning in the Dramatic Text (London: Longmans, Green).
—— (1964) ‘Shakespeare’s language,’ in J. Sutherland and J. Hurstfield(eds), Shakespeare’s World (London: Arnold), pp. 136–55.
—— (1972) Yours that Read Him: An Introduction to Shakespeare’s Language(London: Ginn).
Hussey, Stan. (1992) The Literary Language of Shakespeare. 2nd edn (Londonand New York: Longman).
Jacobsson, Bengt. (1951) Inversion in English with Special Reference to theEarly English Period (Uppsala: Almqvist and Wiksell).
Jespersen, Otto. (1909–49) A Modern English Grammar on Historical Prin-ciples. 7 vols (Copenhagen: Munksgård).
—— (1917) Negation in English and Other Languages. Historisk-filologiskeMeddelser udgivet af det Kgl. Danske Videnskabernes Selskab I: 5.(Copenhagen: Munksgård). [Rptd in Selected Writings of Otto Jespersen(London: Allen and Unwin, n.d.), pp. 3–152]
—— (1948) ‘Shakespeare and the language of poetry,’ in his Growth andStructure of the English Language (Oxford: Blackwell), pp. 199–221.
Jones, John. (1995) Shakespeare at Work (Oxford: Clarendon Press).Jones, Richard Foster. (1953) The Triumph of the English Language. A Sur-
vey of Opinions Concerning the Vernacular from the Introduction of Printingto the Restoration (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press).
Joseph, Sister Miriam. (1947) Shakespeare’s Use of the Arts of Language(New York: Columbia University Press). [Rptd New York and Lon-don: Hafner, 1966]
Jucker, Andreas H. (ed.) (1995) Historical Pragmatics. Pragmatic Developmentsin the History of English. Pragmatics and Beyond n.s. 35 (Amsterdamand Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins).
Jucker, Andreas H. and Irma Taavitsainen. (2000) ‘Diachronic speechact analysis: insults from flyting to flaming,’ Journal of Historical Prag-matics 1: 67–95.
Jud-Schmid, Elisabeth. (1956) Der indefinite Agens von Chaucer bisShakespeare: die Wörter und Wendungen für ‘man’. Swiss Studies in English39 (Bern: Francke).
Kakietek, Piotr. (1972) Modal Verbs in Shakespeare’s English (Poznan:Universytet im. Adama Mickiewicza).
—— (1976) ‘The perfect auxiliaries in the language of Shakespeare,’Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 8: 45–53. [Rptd Salmon and Burness 1987:309–17]
Kastovsky, Dieter (ed.). (1991) Historical English Syntax. Topics in EnglishLinguistics 2 (Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter).
—— (1994) Studies in Early Modern English. Studies in English Linguis-tics 13 (Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter).
Kellner, L. (1885) Zur Syntax des englischen Verbums mit besondererBerücksichtingung Shakespeares (Vienna: Hölder).
Kermode, Frank. (2000) Shakespeare’s Language (London: Allen Lane).King, Arthur H. (1941) The Language of Satirized Characters in Poetaster:
354 Bibliography
A Socio-Stylistic Analysis 1597–1602. Lund Studies in English 10 (Lund:Gleerup).
Kinsley, James and George Parfitt (eds). (1970) John Dryden: Selected Criti-cism (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
Kökeritz, Helge. (1950) ‘Punning names in Shakespeare,’ Modern LanguageNotes 65: 240–3.
—— (1953) Shakespeare’s Pronunciation (New Haven, CT: Yale Univer-sity Press).
König, Ekkehard. (1985) ‘On the history of concessive connectives.Diachronic and synchronic,’ Lingua 66: 1–19.
Kolin, Philip C. (1980) ‘The names of whores and their bawds and pan-ders in English Renaissance drama,’ Midwestern Journal of Languageand Folklore 6: 41–50.
Kopytko, Roman. (1988) ‘The impersonal use of verbs in WilliamShakespeare’s plays,’ Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 21: 41–56.
—— (1993) Polite Discourse in Shakespeare’s English. Seria FilologicaAngielska 24 (Poznan: Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza).
MacIsaac, Warren J. (1978) ‘“A commodity of good names” in the HenryIV plays,’ Shakespeare Quarterly 29: 417–19.
Magnusson, Lynne. (1997) ‘“Voice potential”: language and symboliccapital in Othello,’ SS 50: 91–9.
—— (1999) Shakespeare and Social Dialogue: Dramatic Language and Eliza-bethan Letters (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Mahood, M. M. (1957) Shakespeare’s Wordplay (London: Methuen).
Bibliography 355
Markus, Manfred (ed.). (1988) Historical English, on the Occasion of KarlBrunner’s 100th Birthday (Innsbruck: AMOE).
Matthews, William. (1964) ‘Language in “Love’s Labour’s Lost”,’ Es-says and Studies n.s. 17: 1–11. [Rptd Salmon and Burness 1987: 499–509]
McIntosh, Angus. (1963) ‘“As You Like It”: a grammatical clue to char-acter,’ Review of English Studies 4: 68–81. [Rptd A. McIntosh and M.A. K. Halliday (eds) Patterns of Language: Papers in General, Descrip-tive and Applied Linguistics (London: Longmans, 1966), pp. 70–82]
McIntosh, Carey. (1994) ‘Prestige norms in stage plays, 1600–1800,’ inStein and Tieken-Boon 1994: 63–80.
McKenzie, D. F. (1959) ‘Shakespeare’s punctuation – a new beginning,’Review of English Studies n.s.10: 361–70. [Rptd Salmon and Burness1987: 445–54]
McLeod, Randall. (1981) ‘Unemending Shakespeare’s Sonnet 111,’ Stud-ies in English Literature 1500–1900 21: 75–96.
Melchiori, Giorgio. (1981) ‘The rhetoric of character construction:“Othello”,’ SS 34: 61–72.
Michael, Ian. (1987) The Teaching of English from the Sixteenth Century to1870 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Millward, Celia. (1966) ‘Pronominal case in Shakespearean imperatives,’Language 42: 10–17. [Rptd Salmon and Burness 1987: 301–8]
Mitsui, T. (1985) ‘Relative pronouns in Shakespeare’s colloquial English,’In K. Araki, T. Egawa, T. Oyama and M. Yasui (eds), Studies in EnglishGrammar and Linguistics: A Miscellany in Honour of Takanobu Otsuka(Tokyo: Kenkyusha), pp. 335–49.
Moessner, L. (1992) ‘Relative constructions and functional amalgamationin Early Modern English,’ in Rissanen et al. 1992: 336–51.
—— (1994) ‘Early Modern English passive constructions,’ in Kastovsky1994: 217–31.
Mulholland, J. (1967) ‘“Thou” and “you” in Shakespeare: a study inthe second person pronoun,’ English Studies 48: 1–9. [Rptd Salmonand Burness 1987: 153–61]
Musgrove, S. (1981) ‘Thieves’ cant in King Lear,’ English Studies 62: 5–13.[Rptd Salmon and Burness 1987: 245–53]
Nagucka, Ruta. ‘Grammatical peculiarities of the contact-clause in EarlyModern English,’ FLH 1: 171–84.
Nakatani, K. (1991) ‘Socio-stylistic varieties of Shakespearean language,’in M. Kawai (ed.) Language and Style in English Literature: Essays inHonour of Michio Masui (Tokyo: Eihosha), pp. 473–84.
Nash, W. (1989) ‘Changing the guard at Elsinore,’ in R. Carterand P. Simpson (eds), Language, Discourse and Literature: An Introduc-tory Reader in Discourse Stylistics (London: Unwin Hyman), pp.23–41.
Nevalainen, Terttu. (1985) ‘Lexical variation and Early Modern Englishexclusive adverbs: style switching or a change in progress?,’ in Eatonet al. 1985: 179–94.
—— (1987) ‘But’, ‘Only’ ‘Just’: Focussing Adverbial Change in Modern English1500–1900. Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique 51 (Helsinki: SociétéNéophilologique).
356 Bibliography
—— (1994) ‘Aspects of adverbial change in Early Modern English,’ inKastovsky 1994: 243–59.
—— (1997) ‘Recycling inversion: the case of initial adverbs and negatorsin Early Modern English,’ Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 31: 203–14.
Nevalainen, T. and L. Kahlas-Tarkka. (eds) (1997) To Explain the Present:Studies in the Changing English Language in Honour of Matti Rissanen.Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique 52 (Helsinki: SociétéNéophilologique).
Nevalainen, T. and H. Raumolin-Brunberg. (1994) ‘Its strength and thebeauty of it: the standardization of the third person neuter posses-sive in Early Modern English,’ in Stein and Tieken-Boon 1994: 171–216.
—— (1995) ‘The pragmatics of address formulae in early English corre-spondence,’ in Jucker 1995: 541–601.
Nevo, Ruth. (1987) Shakespeare’s Other Language (London: Methuen).Nocera Avila, C., N. Pantaleo and D. Pezzini. (eds). (1992) Early Modern
English: Trends, Forms and Texts. Cultura Straniera 49 (Fasano: Schena).Nowottny, Winifred. (1957) ‘Lear’s questions,’ SS 10: 90–7.—— (1960) ‘Some aspects of the style of Lear,’ SS 13: 49–57.Nurmi, Arja. (1999) A Social History of Periphrastic ‘Do’. Mémoires de la
Société Néophilologique 56 (Helsinki: Société Néophilologique).Onions, C. T. (1986) A Shakespeare Glossary. 3rd edn revised and en-
larged by Robert D. Eagleson (Oxford: Clarendon Press).Ostheeren, Klaus. (1990) ‘Kontextualismus und Kontextualisierung in der
Analyse der Sprache Shakepeares,’ Shakespeare Jahrbuch (West): 119–42.Padley, G. A. (1985) Trends in Vernacular Grammar: I. Grammatical Theory
in Western Europe 1500–1700 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Palmer, David J. (1965) The Rise of English Studies (London: Oxford
University Press for Hull University).Parkes, M. B. (1993) Pause and Effect: An Introduction to the History of
Punctuation in the West (Aldershot: Scolar).Partridge, A. C. (1964) Orthography in Shakespeare and Elizabethan Drama:
A Study of Colloquial Contractions, Elision, Prosody and Punctuation (Lon-don: Arnold).
—— (1969) Tudor to Augustan English: A Study in Syntax and Style fromCaxton to Johnson. The Language Library (London: Deutsch).
—— (1976) A Substantive Grammar of Shakespeare’s Nondramatic Texts(Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia).
—— (1979) ‘Shakespeare’s English: a bibliographical survey,’ Poetica [Tokyo]11: 46–79.
Pérez-Guerra, Javier. (1999) Historical English Syntax. A Statistical Corpus-Based Study on the Organisation of Early Modern English Sentences. Studiesin Germanic Linguistics 11 (Munich: Lincom Europa).
Petit, Jean-Pierre. (1980) ‘A note on performatives in Richard II,’ in J.-P.Petit (ed.), Discourse and Style II (Lyons: Editions l’Hérmes), pp. 105–7.
Porter, Joseph A. (1979) The Drama of Speech Acts: Shakespeare’s LancastrianTrilogy (Berkeley: University of California Press).
—— (1986) ‘Pragmatics for criticism. Two generations of speech act theory,’Poetics 15: 243–57.
—— (1989) ‘Fraternal pragmatics: speech acts of John and the Bastard,’
Bibliography 357
in Deborah T. Curren-Aquino (ed.), King John: New Perspectives (Newark,DE: University of Delaware Press; London: Associated UniversityPresses), pp. 136–43.
Quirk, Randolph. (1971) ‘Shakespeare and the English language,’ inKenneth Muir and S. Schoenbaum (eds), A New Companion to ShakespeareStudies (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 67–82. [RptdSalmon and Burness 1987: 3–21]
Replogle, Carol. (1973) ‘Shakespeare’s salutations: a study in stylisticetiquette,’ Studies in Philology 70: 172–86. [Rptd Salmon and Burness1987: 101–15]
Rissanen, Matti. (1986) ‘Variation and the study of English historicalsyntax,’ in David Sankoff (ed.), Diversity and Diachrony (Amsterdam:John Benjamins), pp. 97–111.
—— (1991) ‘Spoken language and the history of do-periphrasis,’ inKastovsky 1991: 321–42.
Rissanen, M., O. Ihalainen, T. Nevalainen and I. Taavitsainen (eds). (1992)History of Englishes: New Methods and Interpretations in Historical Lin-guistics. Topics in English Linguistics 10 (Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter).
Rissanen, M., Merja Kytö and M. Palander-Collin (eds). (1993) EarlyEnglish in the Computer Age: Explorations through the Helsinki Corpus(Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter).
Ronberg, Gert. (1992) A Way with Words. The Language of English Renais-sance Literature (London: Arnold).
—— (1995) ‘They had their points: punctuation and interpretation inEnglish Renaissance literature,’ in Jucker 1995: 55–63.
Rothschild, Herbert B., Jr. (1970) ‘Language and social reality in Rich-ard II,’ in T. A. Kirby and W. J. Olive (eds), Essays in Honor of EsmondLinworth Marilla (Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press), pp.56–68.
Rudanko, Juhani. (1993) Pragmatic Approaches to Shakespeare: Essays onOthello, Coriolanus and Timon of Athens (Lanham, New York and Lon-don: University Press of America).
Rydén, M. and S. Brorström. (1987) The BE/HAVE Variation withIntransitives in English. Stockholm Studies in English 70 (Stockholm:Almqvist and Wiksell).
Salmon, Vivian. (1965) ‘Sentence structure in colloquial ShakespearianEnglish,’ Transactions of the Philological Society, pp. 105–40. [Rptd Salmonand Burness 1987: 265–300]
—— (1967) ‘Elizabethan colloquial English in the Falstaff plays,’ LeedsStudies in English n.s.1: 37–70. [Rptd Salmon and Burness 1987: 37–70]
—— (1970) ‘Some functions of Shakespeare’s word–formation,’ SS 23:13–26. [Rptd Salmon and Burness 1987: 193–206]
—— (1979) ‘Early seventeenth-century punctuation as a guide to sen-tence structure,’ in her The Study of Language in 17th-Century England.Studies in the History of Linguistics 17 (Amsterdam: John Benjamins),pp. 47–60.
—— (1986) ‘The spelling and punctuation of Shakespeare’s time,’ inStanley Wells and Gary Taylor (eds), William Shakespeare: The CompleteWorks: Original-spelling Edition (Oxford: Clarendon Press), pp. xlii–lvi.
358 Bibliography
—— (1988) ‘English punctuation theory: 1500–1800,’ Anglia 106: 285–314.Salmon, Vivian and Edwina Burness (eds). (1987) A Reader in the Language
of Shakespearean Drama: Collected Essays. Amsterdam Studies in theTheory and History of Linguistic Science III: 35 (Amsterdam andPhiladelphia, PA: John Benjamins).
—— (1980) Documentation in the O.E.D.: Shakespeare and Nashe as TestCases (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
Scheffer, J. (1975) The Progressive in English. (Amsterdam: North Holland).Scheler, Manfred. (1982) Shakespeares Englisch: eine sprachwissenschaftliche
Einführung. Grundlagen der Anglistik und Amerikanistik 12 (Berlin:Erich Schmidt Verlag).
Schlösser, Anselm. (1969) ‘Zur Bedeutung der Anachronismen beiShakespeare,’ Jahrbuch der Shakespeare-Gesellschaft (Ost) 105: 7–24.
Schmidt, Alexander. (1902) Shakespeare-Lexicon. A Complete Dictionary ofall the English Words, Phrases and Constructions in the Works of the Poet.3rd edn rev. by Gregor Sarrazin. 2 vols (Berlin: Georg Reimer).
Schneider, Edgar W. (1992) ‘Who(m)? Constraints on the loss of casemarking of wh-pronouns in the English of Shakespeare and other poetsof the Early Modern English period,’ in Rissanen et al. 1992: 437–52.
—— (1993) ‘The grammaticalization of possessive of which in MiddleEnglish and Early Modern English,’ FLH 14: 239–57.
Scholtes, Gertrud. (1980) Umgebungsstrukturen von Verben im Shakespeare-Corpus (Frankfurt-am-Main: Peter Lang).
—— (1983) ‘Das Passiv im dramatischen Dialog: Anmerkungen zu seinenFunktionen bei Shakespeare,’ Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik8: 197–209.
Sell, Roger D. (1975) ‘Two types of style contrast in King Lear: a literary-critical appraisal,’ in H. Ringbom et al. (eds), Style and Text: Studiespresented to Nils Erik Enkvist (Stockholm: Språkförlaget Skriptor ABand Åbo Akademi), pp. 158–71.
Seoane Posse, Elena. (1998) ‘The passive as style marker in early modernEnglish: evidence from the Helsinki corpus,’ Miscelánea: A Journal ofEnglish and American Studies 9: 155–72.
Simpson, Percy. (1911) Shakespearian Punctuation (Oxford: Clarendon Press).Singh, Rajendra. (1973) ‘Multiple negation in Shakespeare,’ Journal of
English Linguistics 7: 50–6. [Rptd Salmon and Burness 1987: 339–45]Smallwood, P. J. (1985) Johnson’s Preface to Shakespeare: A Facsimile of the
with plural subjects: a study in the grammar of the First Folio,’ PMLA11: 363–76.
Smith, Jonathan. (1968) ‘The language of Leontes,’ Shakespeare Quar-terly 19: 317–27.
Smithers, G. V. (1970) ‘Guidelines for interpreting the uses of the suffix‘-ed’ in Shakespeare’s English,’ SS 23: 27–37.
Bibliography 359
Spevack, Marvin. (1968–80) A Complete and Systematic Concordance tothe Works of Shakespeare. 9 vols (Hildesheim: Olms).
—— (1985) ‘Shakespeare’s language,’ in John F. Andrews (ed.), WilliamShakespeare: His World, His Work, His Influence. 3 vols (New York: CharlesScribner’s Sons), II: 343–61.
Sprague, A. C. (1980) ‘“True, gallant Raleigh”: some off-stage conversa-tions in Shakespeare’s plays,’ in Edwards, Ewbank and Hunter 1980:183–90.
Staufer, Annegret. (1974) Fremdsprachen bei Shakespeare. Das Vokabularund seine dramatischen Funktionen. Studien zur Anglistik: StudienreiheHumanitas. (Frankfurt: Akademische Verlagsgemeinschaft).
Stein, Dieter. (1974) Grammatik und Variation von Flexionsformen in derSprache der Shakespeare Corpus (Munich: TU Druck und Verlags Union)
—— (1985a) ‘Discourse markers in Early Modern English,’ in Eaton etal. 1985: 283–302.
—— (1985b) ‘Stylistic aspects of syntactic change,’ FLH 6: 153–78.—— (1985c) Natürlicher syntaktischer Sprachwandel: Untersuchungen zur
Entstehung der englischen ‘do’-Periphrase in Fragen (Tübingen: tuduvVerlagsgesellschaft).
—— (1986) ‘Syntactic variation and change: the case of DO in ques-tions in Early Modern English,’ FLH 7: 121–49.
—— (1987) ‘At the crossroads of philology, linguistics and semiotics:notes on the replacement of TH by S in the third person singular inEnglish,’ English Studies 68: 406–32.
—— (1990) The Semantics of Syntactic Change: Aspects of the Evolution of‘do’ in English (Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter).
—— (1994) ‘Sorting out the variants: standardization and social factorsin the English language 1600–1800,’ in Stein and Tieken-Boon 1994:1–17.
Stein, Dieter and Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (eds). (1994) Towardsa Standard English 1600–1800 (Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter).
Stoll, Rita. (1989) Die nicht-pronominale Anrede bei Shakespeare. Neue Studienzur Anglistik und Amerikanistik 41(Frankfurt-am-Main: Peter Lang).
Taavitsainen, Irma. (1995) ‘Interjections in Early Modern English: fromimitation of spoken to conventions of written language,’ in Jucker1995: 439–65.
Taavitsainen, Irma, Gunnel Melchers and Päivi Pahta (eds). (1999) Writingin Non-Standard English (Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: JohnBenjamins).
Taylor, Estelle W. (1972) ‘Shakespeare’s use of s endings of the verbs todo and to have in the First Folio,’ CLA Journal 16: 214–31. [Rptd Salmonand Burness 1987: 371–88]
—— (1976) ‘Shakespeare’s use of eth and es endings of verbs in the FirstFolio,’ CLA Journal 19: 437–57. [Rptd Salmon and Burness 1987: 349–69]
Tilley, M. P. (1916) ‘Some evidence in Shakespeare of contemporary ef-forts to refine the language of the day,’ PMLA 31: 65–78.
Traugott, E. C. (1972) A History of English Syntax: A TransformationalApproach to the History of English Sentence Structure (New York: Holt,Rinehart and Winston).
360 Bibliography
Tritt, Carleton S. (1973) ‘The language of capitalization in Shakespeare’sFirst Folio,’ Visible Language 7: 41–50.
Trnka, B. (1930) On the Syntax of the English Verb from Caxton to Dryden.Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague 3 (Prague: JednotaCeskoslovenskych Matematiku a Fysiku).
Trousdale, Marion. (1982) Shakespeare and the Rhetoricians (Chapel Hill,NC: University of North Carolina Press).
—— (1997) ‘Reading the early modern text,’ SS 50: 135–45.Ukaji, M. (1973) ‘Imperative constructions in Shakespeare,’ Studies in
English Linguistics 2: 71–107.van Peer, Willie (ed.). (1988) The Taming of the Text: Explorations in Language,
Literature and Culture (London and New York: Routledge).Vickers, Brian. (1968) The Artistry of Shakespeare’s Prose (London: Methuen).—— (1971) ‘Shakespeare’s use of rhetoric,’ in Kenneth Muir and S.
Schoenbaum (eds), A New Companion to Shakespeare Studies (Cambridge:Cambridge University Press), pp. 83–98. [Rptd Salmon and Burness1987: 391–406]
—— (1993) Appropriating Shakespeare. Contemporary Critical Quarrels (NewHaven, CT, and London: Yale University Press).
Visser, F. Th. (1963–73) An Historical Syntax of the English Language. 3parts [4 vols] (Leiden: E. J. Brill).
Wales, Kathleen M. (1978) ‘An aspect of Shakespeare’s dynamic language:a note on the interpretation of King Lear III.VII.113: “He childed as Ifather’d”,’ English Studies 59: 395–404. [Rptd Salmon and Burness 1987:181–90]
—— (1983) ‘Thou and you in early modern English: Brown and Gilmanreappraised,’ Studia Linguistica 37: 107–25.
—— (1985) ‘Generic “your” and Jacobean drama: the rise and fall of apronominal usage,’ English Studies 66: 7–24.
Warren, Michael J. (1977) ‘Repunctuation as interpretation in editionsof Shakespeare,’ English Literary Renaissance 7: 155–69. [Rptd Salmonand Burness 1987: 455–69]
Weidhorn, Manfred. (1969) ‘The relation of title and name to identityin Shakespearean tragedy,’ Studies in English Literature 1500–1900 9:303–19.
Weimann, Robert. (1972) ‘Shakespeare’s wordplay: popular origins andtheatrical function,’ in Clifford Leech and J. M. R. Margeson (eds),Shakespeare 1971 (Toronto: Toronto University Press), pp. 230–43.
Wells, Stanley. (1980) ‘Juliet’s Nurse: the uses of inconsequentiality,’ inEdwards, Ewbank and Hunter 1980: 51–66.
—— (1984) Re-Editing Shakespeare for the Modern Reader, Based on LecturesGiven at the Folger Shakespeare Library, Washington, D.C. (Oxford:Clarendon Press).
Wells, Stanley and Gary Taylor. (1980) Modernizing Shakespeare’s Spelling,with Three Studies of the Text of “Henry V” (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
—— (eds). (1987) William Shakespeare: A Textual Companion (Oxford:Clarendon Press).
Whitaker, Virgil K. (1953) Shakespeare’s Use of Learning (San Marino, CA:Huntington Library).
Bibliography 361
Widdowson, H. G. (1982) ‘Othello in person,’ in R. Carter (ed.), Languageand Literature (London: Routledge), pp. 41–52.
Wik, B. (1973) English Nominalizations in –ing: Synchronic and DiachronicAspects (Uppsala: Almqvist and Wiksell).
Wikberg, Kay. (1975) Yes-No Questions and Answers in Shakespeare’s Plays.Acta Academiæ Åboensis Ser. A Vol. 51 nr 1 (Åbo: Åbo Akademi).
Willcock, Gladys D. (1934) Shakespeare as Critic of Language. TheShakespeare Association Papers 18 (London: Oxford University Press).
—— (1943) ‘Shakespeare and rhetoric,’ Essays and Studies 29: 50–61.—— (1954a) ‘Shakespeare and Elizabethan English,’ SS 7: 12–24.—— (1954b) ‘Language and poetry in Shakespeare’s early plays,’ Pro-
ceedings of the British Academy 40: 103–17.Williams, Gordon. (1997) A Glossary of Shakespeare’s Sexual Language
(London and Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Athlone).Williams, Joseph M. (1992) ‘“O! When degree is shak’d”: sixteenth-century
anticipations of some modern attitudes toward usage,’ in Tim Will-iam Machan and Charles T. Scott (eds), English in its Social Contexts:Essays in Historical Sociolinguistics. Oxford Studies in Sociolinguistics(New York and London: Oxford University Press), pp. 69–101.
Wilson, F. P. (1941) ‘Shakespeare and the diction of common life,’ Pro-ceedings of the British Academy 27: 167–97.
Wright, George T. (1981) ‘Hendiadys and Hamlet,’ PMLA 96: 168–93.[Rptd Salmon and Burness 1987: 407–32]
Wright, S. M. (1990) ‘Discourse, style and the rise of periphrastic do inEnglish, FLH 10: 71–91.
Yonglin, Y. (1991) ‘How to talk to the supernatural in Shakespeare,’Language in Society 20: 247–61.
Zitner, Sheldon P. (1974) ‘“King Lear” and its language,’ in Rosalie Colieand F. T. Flahiff (eds), Some Facets of King Lear (London: Heinemann),pp. 3–22.
Index
Note: In the Indices all references are to the section numbering in thisbook. References in the General Index in bold type indicate the principaldiscussions of that feature as well as indicating that the feature is referredto in all or the majority of subsections with the same initial digit(s): thus 7embraces all or most references starting with 7; 7.1 those or most of thosestarting with 7.1, and so on. Sigils of the works of Shakespeare in bracketsrefer to the specific play or poem in which the references to people or placesare located.
GENERAL
Abbott, E. A. A ShakespearianGrammar 1.2.2–3, 3.3.2.6,3.3.3.1, 10.1
6.2.1.4, 9.1.5affix 6.2.5.2Agrippa (AC) 8.2.1, 8.2.6Aguecheek, Sir Andrew
(TN) 3.3.1.3, 4.3.7.7Albany, Duke of (KL) 4.3.6,
8.1.4Alcibiades (Tim) 7.4Alençon, Duke of (2H6) 7.5.2.4Alexas (AC) 9.1.2.2Aliena (AY) 4.3.7.5Allen, M. 1.3All is True see Henry VIIIalliteration 7.5.2.3, 8.4.2All’s Well That Ends
Well 3.2.1.1, 3.2.2.1, 3.2.2.4,3.3.1.3, 3.3.2.1, 3.3.2.4–7,
8.2.1–2, 9.1.7Brackenbury, Lord (R3) 8.1.2Braunmuller, A. R. 5.4, 10Brissenden, A. 8.1.3, 8.3.2Britain (Cym) 4.4.4Brittany, Duke of (2H6) 7.5.2.4Brook, G. L. 1.2.2Brooke, N. 8.3.7, 10Broom, Mr (MW) 4.3.7.1Brown, P. 9.3.1Brown, R. 1.2.3, 9.3.1Brutus (Ham) 4.3.7.7; (JC)
3.2.1.2, 4.3.1, 4.3.2.1, 5.4.2,8.3.1.1, 9.3.2
Buckingham, Duke of(2H6) 5.4.2; (R3) 7.5.2.1
Bullcalf (2H4) 5.1.3.5Burbage, William 1.1.4Burgundy, Duke of (KL) 8.1.4,
8.2.1–3, 8.2.5Burness, E. 1.2.3Burton, D. M. 1.2.3, 8.4.3
Caesarion (AC) 3.3.4.2.2Cain (Ham) 3.3.2.6Caius, Dr (MW) 4.3.7.7, 8.2.1Calabria, Duke of (2H6) 7.5.2.4Caliban (Tem) 6.2.1.1Calvo, C. 3.3.2.1.1Cambyses, King (1H4) 8.3.8Camillo (WT) 4.3.1.1, 5.3.2.9,
6.2.3.1Canterbury, Archbishop of
(H5) 7.5.2.2Capitol (Ham) 4.3.9Capulet, Lady (RJ) 4.2.2.2Cardenio 1.1.5Carthage (MN) 3.3.3.1
Greek 2.3.2.2Greeks (TC) 5.4.2Grey, Lady see Elizabeth, QueenGreymalkin (Mac) 2.3.2.1Grice, H. P. 9.1.1Grumio (TS) 3.3.2.1, 6.4.1Guiderius (Cym) 6.3.5Guildenstern (Ham) 6.4.1,
Jaggard, William 1.1.2James I 1.1.4Jaques (AY) 6.3.5Jenkins, H. 10.1Jessica (MV) 8.3.1.1Jeweller (Tim) 8.3.2Joan of Arc (1H6) 8.1.2John, Don (MA) 6.3.5John, King of England (KJ) 8.1John of Gaunt (R2) 3.3.6.1,
8.3.1.1, 8.3.2.2John of Lancaster (2H4) 2.2.7,
7.1.2.3Johnson, Samuel 1.2.1Jones, J. 6.4Jones, R. F. 2.1Jonson, Ben 1.2.2, 2.1, 10.1Jove/Jupiter (Cym) 7.1.2.1;
Pharamond (H5) 7.5.2.2Philip of France (KJ) 8.1Philo (AC) 8.2.1Phoebus (Cym) 4.4.4Phoenix and the Turtle, The 1.1.2phonology 1.2.2phrase 2.2.3.2, 2.2.4.3, 2.2.9,
8.1.4Ross (Mac) 10.2Rowe, N. 8.3.7Rudanko, J. 1.2.3, 9.1.3, 9.1.6Rugby, John/Jack
(MW) 3.3.2.1, 7.2.4, 8.2.1Russia, Emperor of (MM) 5.4.2Rutland, Earl of (3H6) 8.3.1.1
St George (R2) 4.3.1.1Salic Law (H5) 7.5.2.2Salmon, V. 1.2.3, 2.1, 5.1.3.6,
7.3.3Salusbury, Sir John and
Lady 1.1.2Samson (2H4) 7.1.1.1Schaefer, J. 1.2.1Scheler, M. 1.2.2Schmidt, A. 1.2.2, 5.4, 10.2Scotland (Mac) 4.3.6, 8.2.8Scots (1H4) 3.3.5Senior, Duke (AY) 6.3.5sentence 2.2.5, 4.3.1.1, 4.3.9,
grammatical 5.4, 6.3; hard2.1; indefinite 6.2.3.1;Latinate 8.4.2; lexical5.1.2.2, 5.4, 6.3; loan 3.2;new 3.3.1.3; of size 3.3.3.5;of mass 3.3.4.3.2; open class3.1, 5.1.2.1, 5.1.3.7; order2.2, 2.2.1, 3.2.2.4, 3.2.3,4.3.1, 4.3.7.4, 6.2.2, 7; play2.1, 4.3.9; status 8.1.3;vogue 5.1.3.1
Wriothesley, Henry, Earl ofSouthampton 1.1.2
Yonglin, Y. 8.1.1Yorick (Ham) 3.3.6.1York: Archbishop of
(1H4) 3.2.1.2; (2H4) 2.2.7;Duke of (H5) 4.3.2; (3H6)8.3.1.1; (R3) 4.3.10
WORDS
Note: Where feasible, the words in this index are modernised in spelling tomake finding them easier for the user. Forms separated by a slash arealternative spellings or forms; meanings are occasionally given in singleinverted commas. Parts of speech are included only when confusion couldotherwise occur and are represented in this index by standard dictionaryabbreviations. Phrases are normally listed under the first word exceptwith verb forms which are listed under the lexical verb.
a ‘in, on, of’ 4.2.8.1, 4.3.7.3,4.3.8.1, 4.3.9, 5.1.2.2–3, 5.4.2;~ bed 5.1.2.2; ~ bleeding4.3.7.3; ~ doing 4.2.8.1,4.3.7.3; ~ hanging 4.3.7.3; ~height 5.1.2.2; ~ horseback5.1.2.2; ~ making 4.3.7.3; ~Monday morning 5.1.2.2; ~night 5.1.2.2; ~ sleeping4.3.7.3; ~ wooing 4.3.7.3; ~work 5.1.2.2; cf. o
a/’a ‘he’ 2.2.8, 2.3.2.4, 3.2.2.1a/an art. 3.3.4.3.1–2; ~ age
3.3.4.3.1; ~ body 3.3.2.7; ~brother’s murder 3.3.1.1; ~gallows 3.3.4.3.2; ~ great
eater of beef 3.3.3.5; ~length 3.3.4.3.1; ~ man3.3.2.7; ~ many fools3.3.4.3.2; ~ present alms3.2.1.1; ~ sail 6.4.2; ~ while3.3.4.3.1; ~ word 5.1.3.7
4.3.6, 5.3.2.2–3, 5.3.2.6,5.3.2.9; as . . . as 5.3.2.9; ~ if4.3.6; ~ just as you willdesire 8.3.3; ~ much asthough I did 8.3.3; ~ oneshould say 3.3.2.7; ~ . . . so5.3.2.3, 7.5.2.4; ~ well ~5.3.2.9; ~ who should say3.3.2.6–7; prep. 2.2.3.2,3.3.2.7, 5.4.2; ~ concerning5.4.2; ~ touching 5.4.2; ~ aresult of 5.4.2
ass 2.1at 4.2.4.1, 5.4.2; ~ all 6.2.3.3,
6.2.7; ~ a word 5.1.3.7,8.3.2; ~ every sentence end3.2.1.2
athwart 5.4.2aught see oughtavaunt 5.2.2, 8.2.7away adv. 5.1.2.1, 5.1.3.4; interj.
5.3.2.4be it that conj. 5.3.2.5belike 5.1.3.5, 5.1.3.7believe me 8.3.3bench 6.2.5.2beneath 3.3.3.1bend 4.3.1.1; ~ up 4.3.10beseech 4.3.7.4beshrew my heart 5.1.3.7beside/besides adv. 5.1.3.4;
prep. 5.4.2best conditioned 3.3.3.1bestrid/bestride 4.2.4.1betide 4.4.1betime/betimes 5.1.2.2, 5.1.3.3better 5.1.2.4, 6.3.5between n. 3.3.1.3; prep. 5.4.2betwixt/’twixt 5.4.2beware 5.3.2.1bid 4.3.1.1big 3.3.3.6bishop 2.2.7blame, to 4.3.1.5blasphemy 3.3.1.2bless you 8.2.3, 8.2.7blood 6.4.1blowed 4.2.4.1.blush 5.4.2; blushing 5.4boarded 9.2body 3.3.2.7Bohemia 3.3.6.5books 7.1.2.4both 3.3.5; both . . . and 5.3.1,
6.1.1.1bound 4.4.3bounteous 8.1.4bowels 3.2.3.3bow wow 5.2.4boy 8.1.2–3brag 5.4.2brain v. 4.4.3; brains n. 3.2.1.1branded 4.2.4.1brave death 6.3.2.5break-neck 3.3.1.4break 10.2; pp. broke 4.2.4.1,
390 Index
10.2; ~ neck 3.3.1.4; ~ up4.3.10; ~-vow 3.3.1.4
breath/breathe 2.3.2.1breathless 2.3.2.1breeches 3.2.1.1breed-bate 3.3.1.4breeding 9.2brief/briefly 5.1.2.1, 5.1.3.3brother 8.1, 8.1.2; ~ of England
8.1; ~ of Gloucester 8.1.2;brother’s 3.3.3.4
brought up 4.3.10Brutus love 3.2.1.2bully rook 8.2.3bull’s pizzle 8.1.3Burgundy 8.1.4burthen 6.2.5.6but adv. 3.3.6.2, 5.1.3.1, 5.1.3.5;
conj. 5.3, 5.3.1, 5.3.2.4–5,7.1.2.1; prep. 5.4.2; ~ for5.4.2; ~ for you 8.3.1.2;~ this 7.5.2.2; ~ that 5.3.2.5;pron. 3.2.2.4, 3.3.3.1
buttocks 3.2.1.1buzz buzz 5.2.3, 6.4.1by adv. 5.1.3.4; ~ and by
5.1.3.3; prep. 2.1, 5.4.2;~ Apollo 5.1.3.7; ~cock 5.2.5; ~ earth 5.1.3.7;~ example 5.1.3.7; ~ thefaith of my love 5.1.3.7;~ goggs 5.2.5; ~ graceitself I swear 5.2.5; ~heaven 1.1.4; ~ himself5.4.2; ~ my faith 8.3.5;~ my troth 8.3.2, 8.3.5; ~night’s blackness 3.3.1.1;~ reason of 5.4; ~ the fairhand of my lady 8.3.5; ~these gloves 8.3.5; ~ yeaand no 8.3.3; birlady/by’rlakin 5.1.3.7, 5.2.5; ~ howmuch/~ so much conj.5.3.2.9, 5.4.2
Caesar 2.3.2.2, 4.4.1; Cæsar’sdeath’s hour 3.2.1.2
call 1.2.2, 2.3.2.3; called 10.2calm 4.3.3
can 2.1, 4.2.2.2, 4.2.4.4, 4.3.7.9;canst 4.2.2.2, 4.3.3
canary ‘quandary’ 8.4.2candy 6.2.5.2cannon 3.2.1.1Carthage queen 3.3.3.1case 5.1.3.5catch, pp. catcht 4.2.4.1cavaleiro justice 8.2.3cease 4.4.3–4certain of 3.3.5; certainer 3.2.3.4certes 5.1.3.6chance adv. 4.3.7.9, 5.1.3.5; v.
4.4.1, 7.1.2.3change 4.2.7, 4.3.9charged 4.2.9, 6.3.1Charles his glikes 3.2.1.2Charmian 8.2.1chat 4.4.3child 8.1.2choler 3.3.4.3.2chose pp. 4.2.5churls their thoughts 3.2.1.2Clarence 8.1.2clean 5.1.3.1clear 4.3.10, 4.4.4clept 10.2clerk-like 3.3.6.2climate 4.4.3clipped 10.2closed 10.2cock’s passion 5.2.5command 10.2come v. 4.1, 4.2.1–2, 4.2.7,
4.2.9, 4.3.1, 4.3.3, 4.3.5,4.3.7.4, 4.4.2, 4.4.4, 5.1.2.2,5.2.5, 6.4.2, 7.2, 7.2.2, 7.2.4–5,7.3.1, 8.3.4, 10.1–2; ~ along4.3.10; ~ and go 8.3.4;~ away 8.3.4; ~ by 5.4.2;~ come 6.4.1–2, 8.3.4; ~ in10.2; ~ on 4.3.10, 6.4.2;~ thy ways 5.1.2.2; ~ up4.3.10; ~ what will 8.3.4;interj. 5.2.5; ~ by 5.4.2
coming-on 3.3.3.1commence 4.4.4commend: ~ me to them 8.2.7;
I ~ my duty 8.2.7
Index 391
commenting 6.3.5complain 4.3.10, 4.4.2, 5.4.2;
~ me 4.4.2; ~ on 4.3.10concerning 5.4.2concluded on 4.3.10conclusions, there must
be 8.4.1condition: upon ~ that 5.3.2.5conditionally that 5.3.2.5confess, I must 8.3.3confound 4.4.2considering 4.3.8conspire 5.4.1.1content 7.6continue 4.4.4, 7.1.3cony-catching 3.3.3.1Cordelia 8.1.4Cornwall 8.1.4corpse 3.2.1.1cos ‘cousin’ 8.1.2could 4.2.4.4, 4.3.7.9Count 3.3.4.2.2, 8.1.2; ~ his
dazzling 3.3.6.2dead 3.3.3.4dear 8.1.4; ~ my lord 8.1.4;
~ queen 8.2.4death 3.3.2.6, 3.3.4.2.2, 3.3.4.3.2debt 2.3.2.2deceives/deceiveth 8.3.8deem of 4.3.10deep 3.3.3.1deer 2.3.2.3deflower 4.4.3depart 4.4.3descend 4.2.7desire n. 2.3.2.2, 4.3.8;
v. 2.3.2.2; I do ~ it 9.1.5desist 6.2.7despair 4.4.3, 5.4.2detest ‘protest’ 8.3.7, 8.4.2devil’s teeth 9.2dig, pp. digged 4.2.4.1diligence 3.3.1.2dine with 4.3.10dis- 6.2.5.2discourse 6.3.5dislike 4.4.1dissembler 8.1.2distemper’d 7.3.4dive 2.3.2.2do 2.3.1, 4.2.2, 4.2.3.1, 4.3.2–3,
4.3.7.4, 5.3.2.2, 6.1.1.6, 7.1.3,7.2.2–3, 7.3.1, 7.3.3, 7.3.5,8.3.6, 8.3.8; does/doth 4.2.2;did 8.3.7; ~ but 8.3.6; bedoing 4.2.1.1, 4.3.7.3; done10.2; being done 4.2.5;having done 4.2.5; ish illdone 8.4.1; don’t 6.2.1.1
dog 8.1.3; unmanner’d ~ 8.1.2doing n. 3.3.1.3door 3.2.1.1double sure 3.3.3.6doubt n. 2.3.2.2; v. 5.4.2Douglas 8.1.3dove-house 3.2.1.2doves-down 3.2.1.2downward/downwards 5.1.2.2dozen of 3.3.5dread 8.1.4dreadful 3.3.3.4
392 Index
drink 4.3.9; hath drunk himself3.3.2.3
drown’d, drown’d 6.4.1duchess 2.3.2.2duke 8.1, 8.1.2, 8.1.4; dukes of
waterish Burgundy 8.1.4dun 1.2.1durst see dare
each 3.3.2.7, 3.3.5; ~ man 3.3.2.7earlier 5.1.3.3easier 5.1.2.4eat 4.2.4.1Edmund 8.1.4egg 10.2Egypt 8.1.1; Egypt’s queen
3.3.1.1eine ‘eyes’ 3.2.1.1either 6.2.3.1; either/or . . . or
5.3.1, 6.1.1.6eld/elder 3.2.3.4else 5.3.1‘em see thememperor 8.1, 8.1.2empress 8.1.2emured 4.2.7encamp 4.4.2end all n. 3.3.1.4endeavour 4.4.2enforced 3.3.6.2English 3.3.6.1enough 3.3.3.1, 4.3.1.1enter 4.2.7ere conj. 5.3.2.4erection ‘direction’ 8.4.2erst 5.1.3.3eternal 3.3.6.1even 5.1.3.1, 5.1.3.5; ~ now
5.1.1ever 3.3.2.5, 3.3.4.3.2, 5.1.3.6,
7.1.3.4; ~ and anon 5.1.3.3every 3.3.2.7; ~ man 3.3.2.7everybody 3.3.2.7example 5.1.3.7exceeding 5.1.3.1excellent 3.3.3.6, 5.1.3.1, 6.4.1;
~ good 3.1except conj. 5.3.2.5; prep. 5.4;
~ my life 6.4.2
exceptionally 5.1.1exile 4.2.9expectation 10.2eye v. 4.4.3eyne see eine
fail 4.4.3faint 4.4.1fair: ~ maiden 8.1.2; ~ queen
8.3.1.1; fairest Cordelia 8.1.4faith 5.1.3.7; ~ no 5.1.3.6fall, pp. fell 4.2.4.1fang 2.3.2.2far 5.1.2.2, 5.1.3.1; ~
forth 5.1.3.4; ~ off 5.4.2;~ unworthy 5.1.3.1
fare 4.3.3; ~ thee/you well8.2.7–8; farewell 4.3.3
fartuous ‘virtuous’ 8.4.2fast v. 4.2.4.1; adj 5.1.2.1;
fasting 6.3.5father 3.3.2.6, 8.1.1–2; ~ Jew
3.3.1.1fathom 3.2.1.1fault 2.3.2.2fear 4.4.3, 10.2; ~ me 4.4.2,
~ all 5.3.2.8; ~ as 5.3.2.4;~ because 5.3.2.4; ~ fear
Index 393
lest 5.3.2.7; ~ God sake3.2.1.2; ~ justice sake3.2.1.2; ~ look you 8.4.1;~ that 5.3.2.4, 5.3.2.7; ~ to4.3.1.1; ~ to that 5.3.2.1;~ why 5.3.2.4; prep. 5.4.2,7.1.3; for’t ‘for it’ 2.3.2.4,3.3.2.1; ~ the sake of 5.4.2–3;~ ought I know 9.1.5
forbear me 9.3.1Ford’s 3.2.1.2‘fore 2.2.8, 5.4.2; cf. afore, beforeforehand 3.3.3.1forest side 3.2.1.2forsooth 8.3.5forth adv. 5.1.3.4–5; prep. 5.4.2,
I/ich 2.3.2.1, 3.2.2.1, 3.3.2.1,3.3.2.6–7, 4.2.9, 4.3.1.1, 4.3.8,4.4.1, 10.2; see also ay
Iago 9.2if 4.3.2.1, 4.3.6, 4.3.7.6, 4.3.7.8,
4.4.1, 5.1.1, 5.3.2.5; ~ case5.3.2.5; if . . . or 5.3.2.5; ~ so5.3.2.3
ignorant 3.3.3.4import 4.4.1impose n. 3.3.1.3in/i/i’ prep. 2.1, 5.4, 5.4.1.3,
5.4.2; ~ case 5.3.2.5; i’ faith5.1.3.6; 8.3.5; ~ good sooth8.3.6; ~ hand with 5.4.3;~ happy time 8.2.4, 9.2;~ lieu of 5.4.3; ~ pain of5.4.3; ~ peril of 5.4.3;~ shadow 3.3.4.2.2; ~ sooth5.1.3.6; ~ spite of 5.4.3;~ the best 3.3.4.2.2; ~ thecap 3.3.6.1; ~ the greatnessof 5.4.3; ~ the hand of5.4.3; ~ the last 3.3.4.2.2;~ the top of 5.4.3; ~ time10.2; ~ truth 8.3.7; ~ theway of 5.4.3; ~ the world6.2.3.3
prep. 3.3.2.1–2, 3.3.3.3, 3.3.5,4.3.8.1, 5.1.2.2, 5.4.1.3, 5.4.2,6.3.3, 6.4.1, 7.1.3.3; ~ day5.1.2.2; ~ late 5.1.2.3;~ them 3.3.5; ~ which3.2.2.4; ~ the which 3.2.2.4
off prep. 5.4.2offer 3.3.2.1oft 5.1.3.3
often 3.3.3.1, 5.1.3.3; ~ known3.3.6.5
oh interj. 7.4, 8.3.5, 8.3.7; ~ me5.2.2; ~ God 6.4.2
old, older 3.2.3.4, 3.3.3.3,3.3.6.3; ~ man 8.1.4
on 4.2.8.1, 5.1.2.2, 5.4.1.2–3,5.4.2; ~ account of 5.4.2;~ (the) height of 5.4.3; ~Monday night 5.1.2.3; ~ myword 8.3.5; ~ might 5.1.2.2;~ (the) pain of 5.4.3; ~ perilof 5.4.3; ~ this side Tiber3.2.1.2
once 3.3.1.3, 5.1.3.3one 3.3.1.3, 3.3.2.7, 3.3.4.3.1,
3.3.5, 6.3.5; ~ of 3.3.5oneself 3.2.2.3only adj. 3.3.2.2, 3.3.3.1; adv.
3.3.3.3Paul’s 3.2.1.2pay 3.3.2.1peace be with you 8.2.7peer 4.4.3pent-house lid 3.2.1.2peradventure 5.1.3.5Percy 8.1.3perfectest 3.2.3.4perforce 8.3.2perhaps 4.3.7.9perishen 4.2.2physician 2.3.2.2pick-thanks 3.3.1.4piecemeal 5.1.2.2pish interj. 5.2.2, 8.3.5pity 3.3.4.3.2; ~ pleading
3.3.3.1plague 8.3.5plaguy 3.3.3.6playing 4.3.7.3; played on
4.3.10please 4.2.3, 4.3.2.1, 4.4.1,
7.1.2.3; ~ God 4.4.1; ~ you4.4.1; so ~ you 4.4.1; itpleaseth me 4.2.2
poll 3.2.1.1poor 3.2.3, 8.1.4; ~ souls 8.3.7possess 4.3.9possible 5.1.2.1pound 3.2.1.1pour 2.3.2.1power 2.3.2.1pox 8.3.5praise: I ~ heaven for it 8.3.7pray 5.1.3.7, 7.1.2.3; ~ heaven
4.2.3; I ~ God 4.2.3, 5.1.3.7;I ll go ~ 8.2.8; I ~ 8.3.2; I ~thee/you 4.2.3, 5.1.3.7, 7.2,
8.3.7; ~ you 8.3.2; praying3.2.1.2
prepare n. 3.3.1.3presently 5.1.1, 5.1.3.3presume, I 8.3.2pretty 3.3.3.6, 5.1.3.2, 6.3.5prey 2.2.8prince 8.1.2, ~ Troilus 8.1; O
princes 8.1.4princely Henry 8.1.3princess 8.1.2prithee/prethee 4.2.3, 5.1.3.7,
7.2, 8.3.2proceed to 4.4.4profane 2.3.2.2promise 3.3.2.1, 4.3.7.4properer 3.2.3.4protest, I 8.3.6; see detestprove 4.3.3provided that 5.3.2.5public 2.3.2.2puh interj. 5.2.2put on 4.3.10Pythagoras time 3.2.1.2
~ king 8.1.4; ~ Lear 8.1.3–4;~ majesty 8.1.4; ~ sir 8.1.4
royalty 3.3.1.2run 4.3.3, 4.4.2–4, 7.1.3.4
sad v. 4.4.3; ~ brow 8.1.3sadden 4.4.3sail 3.2.1.1same 3.3.4.5sans prep. 5.4, 5.4.2save: ~ for 5.4.2; ~ you 8.2.3saving prep. 5.4.2say v. 7.1.2.3, 7.3.1, 8.3.2; to
~ precisely 5.1.3.7; ~ what8.3.2; as they ~ 8.3.2–3;how ~ you 8.3.2; I ~ 8.2.1,8.2.3, 8.3.1.1, 8.3.2, 8.3.6,interj. 5.2.3; I ~ little 8.4.1; Iwill ~ 8.3.2; as thou saist
5.1.3.5–6, 5.3.2.1, 5.3.2.6,6.3.5, 7.1.1.1; conj. 5.3.2.3,5.3.2.5, 5.3.2.9; ~ as 5.3.2.3;so . . . as 5.3.2.3, 5.3.2.9;~ Chrish save me 8.4.1;~ far 5.3.2.9; ~ for 5.3.2.9;~ God save me 8.4.1; ~long 5.3.2.9, ~ much 5.3.2.9,~ oft 5.3.2.9, ~ soon 5.3.2.9;~ that 5.3.2.3
so-forth n. ‘cuckold’ 3.3.1.3soft 4.3.3soldier servant 3.2.1.2some 3.3.2.7, 3.3.4.4, 3.3.5;
~ danger 9.3.1; ~ excellentfortune 3.3.4.4; ~ foul issue3.3.4.4; ~ kind of men3.2.1.2; ~ other 3.3.2.7;~ whether 5.1.3.4
take 4.3.3, 5.1.1, 6.3.1.3; ~ heed5.3.2.1; ~ off 3.3.1.3; ~ theethat to 10.2; taken 3.3.6.2
taking off 3.3.1.3tale 2.3.2.3talk 2.2.9; be talking 4.3.7.3t’anticipate 2.3.2.4Tarpeian 3.3.3.4Tarquin’s self 3.3.1.3tasting 6.3.5teeths 3.2.1.1tell 10.1: I ~ 8.3.6; I can ~
you by the way 8.3.7; I can~ them that too 8.3.3; ~ me9.1.6; was told 7.1.3
adj. 3.2.3.2, 3.3.1.3, 3.3.4.1,3.3.4.2.1, 3.3.4.5; ~ riches3.2.1.1; ~ tidings 3.2.1.1;~ yon green boy 3.2.3.2,3.3.4.1; conj. 4.3.7.5, 4.3.7.8,4.4.4, 5.3, 5.3.1, 5.3.2.1–2,
5.3.2.6, 5.3.2.8, 7.1.2.1,7.1.2.4, 7.4, 7.4.1, 7.5.2.1,10.2; ~ that 3.3.2.4, 3.3.2.6;pron. 3.2.2.4, 3.3.2.1, 3.3.2.4,3.3.2.6, 3.3.6.2, 3.3.6.5, 4.3.3,7.1.3, 10.2; that is therendezvous of it 8.4.1 ~ which 3.3.2.4, 10.2
the 3.3.1.3, 3.3.4.2.1–2, 4.3.8.1,4.3.9, 5.4.2; ~ Archbishop’sGrace of York 3.2.1.2;~ better 3.3.4.2.2; ~ cripple3.3.6.1; ~ death 3.3.4.2.2;~ devil 8.3.5; ~ Duke ofGloucester’s purse 3.2.1.2;~ gods 3.3.4.2.2; ~ humourof it is too hot 8.4.1; ~ king8.1.4; ~ longer liver 3.3.2.5;~ money in his desk 3.3.6.1;~ set of sun 3.2.1.2; ~ veryports 5.4.1.1; ~ which3.2.2.4, 3.2.3.2, 3.3.2.6;~ whom 3.3.2.6; ~whoreson 8.1.4; ~ worse3.3.4.2.2; conj. 5.3.2.9
well 3.3.6.2, 5.1.3.1, 8.3.1.2,8.3.7, 10.2; ~ be with you4.4.1; ~ done 6.3.5; ~foughten 4.2.5; ~ met 8.2.3;~ my lads 8.3.1.2; ~ sirs8.3.1.2
well-a-day 8.3.5; a welady5.2.2
whale’s bone 3.2.1.2what 2.3.2.2, 3.2.2.4, 3.3.2.1,
3.3.2.5–7, 3.3.4.3.2, 7.1.2.1,7.3.3, 7.4, 8.2.1; ~ time conj.5.3.2.4; adv. 5.1.3.7, 8.3.1.1,8.3.2; ~ ho 8.2.1; ~ Jessica8.3.1.1; ~ Lucius ho 8.3.1.1;~ a plague 8.3.6; ~ so 3.3.5;~ though 5.3.2.8
whats 2.3.2.4when 4.3.5, adv. 5.1.3.7, 7.3,
8.3.1.1; ~ Harry ~ 8.3.1.1;~ Lucius ~ 8.3.1.1; conj.5.3.2.4, ~ as 5.3.2.2, 5.3.2.4;when . . . then 7.5.2.5
where adv. 3.3.2.6, 5.4, 5.4.2,7.3; conj. 5.3.2.4; n. 3.3.1.3