This prefix never occurs in vernacular Scottish; but we may readily suppose that this and other numerous Southern forms of words are due (as in Gawain Douglas and Lyndesay) to the author’s familiarity with Chaucer’s poems, as evinced by the similarity of the rhythm to Chaucer’s, and by the close resemblance of several passages. Compare, for instance, the first seventy lines of the Prologue with the opening passages of “The Flower and the Leaf,” and “The Complaint of the Black Knight;” and see notes to [ll. 432], [1608]. Indeed, this seems to be the only satisfactory way of accounting for the various peculiarities with which the poem abounds.
Mr J. A. H. Murray, in his remarks printed in the preface to Mr Lumby’s edition of “Early Scottish Verse,” comes to a similar conclusion, and I here quote his words for the reader’s convenience and information. “There is no reason, however, to suspect the scribe of wilfully altering his original; indeed, the reverse appears manifest, from the fact that the ‘Craft of Deyng’ has not been assimilated in orthography to ‘Ratis Raving,’ but distinctly retains its more archaic character; while in ‘Sir Lancelot,’ edited by Mr Skeat for the Early English Text Society, from the handwriting of the same scribe, we have a language in its continual Anglicisms quite distinct from that of the pieces contained in this volume, of which the Scotch is as pure and unmixed as that of the contemporary Acts of Parliament. With regard to the remarkable transformation which the dialect has undergone in Sir Lancelot, there seems reason, therefore, to suppose that it was not due to the copyist of the present MS., but to a previous writer, if not to the author himself, who perhaps affected southernism, as was done a century later by Lyndesay and Knox, and other adherents of the English party in the Reformation movement. The Southern forms are certainly often shown by the rhyme to be original, and such a form as tone for tane = taken, is more likely to have been that of a Northerner trying to write Southern, than of a Southern scribe, who knew that no such word existed in his dialect. The same may be said of the th in the second person singular. A Scotch writer, who observed that Chaucer said he liveth, where he himself said he lyves, might be excused for supposing that he would also have said thou liveth for the Northern thow lyves; but we can hardly fancy a Southern copyist making the blunder.”
4. We find not only the Northumbrian forms sall and suld, but also shall, shalt, and shuld.
5. As regards pronouns, we find the Scottish scho (she) in [l. 1169]; but the usual form is sche. We find, too, not only the broad forms thai, thair, thaim, but also thei (sometimes the), ther, and them. As examples of forms of the relative pronoun, we may quote who, quho, whois, quhois (whose), quhom, qwhome (whom), quhat, qwhat (what), and whilk, quhilk, quhich, quich, wich (which). Wich is used instead of who ([l. 387]), and we also find the wich, or the wich that, similarly employed. The nominative who does not perhaps occur as a simple relative, but has the force of whoso, or he who, as e.g., in [l. 1102]; or else it is used interrogatively, as in [l. 1172].
6. Many other peculiarities occur, which it were tedious to discuss fully. It may suffice, perhaps, to note briefly these following. We find both the soft sound ch, as in wich, sich, and the hard sound k, as in whilk, reke (reach), streke (stretch), etc.; which are the true Northern forms.
Mo is used as well as more.
Tho occurs for then in [l. 3184]; and for the in [l. 247].
At occurs as well as that; atte as well as at the, [627], [1055].
The short forms ma (make), ta (take), sent (sendeth), stant (standeth), are sometimes found; the two former being Northumbrian.