If a few sporadic developments be excluded because they may turn up anywhere at any time, then, provided sufficient evidence were available,[29] it would be possible to mark the boundaries within which any given dialectal feature occurs at a particular period: we could draw the line south of which þire 'these' is not found, or the line bounding the district in which the Norse borrowing kirke occurs; just as French investigators in L'Atlas linguistique de la France have shown the distribution of single words and forms in the modern French dialects.
[29] Sufficient evidence is not available. If in the year 1340 at every religious house in the kingdom a native of the district had followed the example of Michael of Northgate, and if all their autograph copies had survived, we should have a very good knowledge of Middle English at that time. If the process had been repeated about every ten years the precision of our knowledge would be greatly increased. For the area in which any feature is found is not necessarily constant: we know that in the pres. p. the province of -ing was extending throughout the fourteenth century; that the inflexion -es in 3 sg. pres. ind. was a Northern and North-Midland feature in the fourteenth century, but had become general in London by Shakespeare's time. And though less is known about the spread of sound changes as distinct from analogical substitutions, it cannot be assumed that their final boundaries were reached and fixed in a moment. There is reason to regret the handicap that has been imposed on ME. studies by the old practice of writing in Latin or French the documents and records which would otherwise supply the exactly dated and localized specimens of English that are most necessary to progress.
Of more general importance is the fixing of boundaries for sound changes or inflexions that affect a large number of words, a task to which interesting contributions have been made in recent years on the evidence of place-names (see especially A. Brandl, Zur Geographie der altenglischen Dialekte, Berlin 1915, which supplements the work of Pogatscher on the compounds of street and of Wyld on the ME. developments of OE. y). For example, on the evidence available, which does not permit of more than rough indications, OE. ā remains ā, and does not develop to ǭ, north of a line drawn west from the Humber (§ 7 b i); -and(e) occurs in the ending of the pres. p. as far south as a line starting west from the Wash (§ 13 ii); farther south again, a line between Norwich and Birmingham gives the northern limit for Stratton forms as against Stretton (§ 8 iv, note).[30] The direction of all these lines is roughly east and west, yet no two coincide. But if the developments of OE. y (§ 7 b ii) are mapped out, u appears below a line drawn athwart from Liverpool to London, and normal e east of a line drawn north and south from the western border of Kent. Almost every important feature has thus its own limits, and the limits of one may cross the limits of another.
[30] The evidence of place-names does not agree entirely with the evidence of texts. Havelok, which is localized with reasonable certainty in North Lincolnshire, has (a)dradd in rimes that appear to be original, and these indicate a North-Eastern extension of the area in which OE. strǣt, drǣdan appear for normal Anglian strēt, drēda(n). This evidence, supported by rimes in Robert of Brunne, is too early to be disposed of by the explanation of borrowing from other dialects, nor is the testimony of place-names so complete and unequivocal as to justify an exclusive reliance upon it.
What then is a ME. dialect? The accepted classification is
| { South-Western | = | OE. West Saxon | |
| Southern | { | ||
| { South-Eastern | = | OE. Kentish | |
| { East Midland } | |||
| Midland | { } | = | OE. Mercian |
| {West Midland } | |||
| Northern | = | OE. Northumbrian |
with the Thames as boundary between Southern and Midland, and the Humber between Midland and Northern. And yet of five actual limiting lines taken at random, only the first coincides approximately with the line of Humber or Thames.
Still the classification rests on a practical truth. Although each dialectal feature has its own boundaries, these are not set by pure chance. Their position is to some extent governed by old tribal and political divisions, by the influence of large towns which served as commercial and administrative centres, and by relative ease of communication. Consequently, linguistic features are roughly grouped, and it is a priori likely that London and Oxford would have more features in common than would London and York, or Oxford and Hull; and similarly it is likely that for a majority of phenomena York and Hull would stand together against London and Oxford. Such a grouping was recognized in the fourteenth century. Higden and his authorities distinguish Northern and Southern speech (XIII b); in the Towneley Second Shepherds' Play, ll. 201 ff., when Mak pretends to be a yeoman of the king, he adopts the appropriate accent, and is promptly told to 'take outt that Sothren tothe'. In the Reeves Tale Chaucer makes the clerks speak their own Northern dialect, so we may be sure that he thought of it as a unity.
But had Chaucer been asked exactly where this dialect was spoken, he would probably have replied, Fer in the North,—I kan nat telle where. A dialect has really no precise boundaries; its borders are nebulous; and throughout this book 'Southern', 'Northern', &c., are used vaguely, and not with any sharply defined limits in mind. The terms may, however, be applied to precise areas, so long as the boundaries of single dialect features are not violently made to conform. It is quite accurate to say that -and(e) is the normal ending of the pres. p. north of the Humber, and that u for OE. y is found south of the Thames and west of London, provided it is not implied that the one should not be found south of the Humber, or the other north of the Thames. Both in fact occur in Gawayne (Cheshire or Lancashire); and in general the language of the Midlands was characterized by the overlapping of features which distinguish the North from the South.
From what has been said it should be plain that the localization of a piece of Middle English on the evidence of language alone calls for an investigation of scope and delicacy. Where the facts are so complex the mechanical application of rules of thumb may give quick and specious results, but must in the end deaden the spirit of inquiry, which is the best gift a student can bring to the subject.