Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-q6k6v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T19:19:17.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How to talk to the supernatural in Shakespeare1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2009

Yang Yonglin
Yang Yonglin
Affiliation:
Foreign Languages Department, Northwest Normal University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present study concerns itself mainly with Shakespeare's use of thou forms to individual ghosts, witches, and spirits. All of Shakespeare's 37 plays were examined; 10 were systematically searched for stretches of discourse that occur between human beings and supernatural beings. The proposition is advanced that there is a role-governed rule in the use of this pronoun to individual supernatural beings. The illustrations, statistical results, discussion, and citations from other sources support the proposition forcefully; unique exceptions are taken into consideration. Instances that indicate the possibility of a reciprocal use from and between such beings are given as well, together with possible reasons for the usage. (Pronouns of address, Shakespearean studies, supernatural beings)

Type
Articles
Information
Language in Society , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , June 1991 , pp. 247 - 261
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

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

REFERENCES

Abbott, E. A. ([1870] 1972). A Shakespearian grammar. Revised and enlarged edition. New York: Haskell House.Google Scholar
Abrams, M. H. et al. , (eds.) (1986). The Norton anthology of English literature. Vol. I, part 1. 5th ed.New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Barber, C. L. (1965). The history of speech and language. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell.Google Scholar
Barton, A. (1974). A brief introduction to A midsummer night's dream. In Evans, G. B. et al. (1974). 217–21.Google Scholar
Baugh, A. C. et al. , (1978). A history of the English language. 3rd ed.London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Blake, N. F. (1983). Shakespeare's language: An introduction. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, R., & Oilman, A. (1960). The pronouns of power and solidarity. In Sebeok, T. A. (ed.), Style in language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 253–76. Reprinted in P. P. Giglioli (ed.), Language and social context. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1972. 252–82.Google Scholar
Brown, R., & Oilman, A. (1989). Politeness theory and Shakespeare's four major tragedies. Language in Society 18:159–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryant, M. M. (1948). Modern English and its heritage. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Burnley, D. (1983). A guide to Chaucer's language. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Emerson, O. F. (1915). A brief history of the English language. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Evans, G. B. et al. , (eds.) (1974). The Riverside Shakespeare. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Ewbank, I.-S. (1979). “Hamlet” and the power of words. In Muir, K. et al. (eds.), Aspects of Hamlet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 84–101.Google Scholar
Eyre, A. G. (1971). An outline history of England. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Finkenstaedt, T. (1963). You und thou: Studien zur Anrede im Englischen. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulme, H. M. ([1962] 1977). Explorations in Shakespeare's language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Hussey, S. S. (1982). The literary language of Shakespeare. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Jenkins, H. (1979). “Hamlet“ then till now. In Muir, K. et al. (eds.), Aspects of Hamlet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 16–27.Google Scholar
Jespersen, O. (1918). Chapters on English. In Selected writings of Otto Jespersen. London: George Allen & Unwin. 153–345.Google Scholar
Kittredge, J. L. (ed.) (1966). The tragedy of Macbeth. Revised by Irving Ribner. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.Google Scholar
Mclauchlan, J. (1979). The prince of Denmark and Claudius's court. In Muir, K. et al. (eds.), Aspects of Hamlet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 49–63.Google Scholar
Millward, C. (1966). Pronominal case in Shakespearean imperatives. Language 42(1): 10–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Onions, C. T. (1986). A Shakespeare glossary. Enlarged and revised by Eagleson, R. D.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Poutsma, H. (1916). A grammar of late modern English. Groningen: P. Hoordhoff.Google Scholar
Pyles, T., & Algeo, J. (1982). The origins and development of the English language. 3rd ed.New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Ribner, I. (ed.) (1966). Christopher Marlowe's Doctor Faustus. Indianapolis: Odyssey.Google Scholar
Russell, E. (1979). The history of Quakerism. Indiana: Friends United.Google Scholar
Trevelyan, G. M. (1937). History of England. London: Longmans Green & Co.Google Scholar
Trevelyan, G. M. (1946). English social history. London: Longmans Green & Co.Google Scholar
Watson, G. (ed.) (1970). Literary English since Shakespeare. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Yang, Y.-L. (1988). The English pronoun of address: A matter of self-compensation. Sociolinguistics 17:157–80.Google Scholar