Student: Cristian Alvarez

Professor: Ana Castro

Semester: tenth

Subject: Angloamerican literature

Explain how the language (grammar: pronouns and verbs) has evolved from 17 th
century English, as it is shown in the poem of Alfred, Lord Tennyson (1809-
1892)”In Memoriam A. H. H.”

The written language has been seen as human being because both have
changed through the time in order to let a good communication. This can see in old
literature as on novels, poems, tails, miths, among others. Which had a different
grammar and changes the way of writing of some words than nowadays. For this
reason, in this essay is going to focus on how the language has evolved considering
the poem of Alfread, Lord Tennyson (1809-1892) In Memoriam A. H.H.

On one hand, some pronouns have changed from that time to this time. For
example, in the second paragraph, first line, which says “Thine are these orbs of
light and shade”. “Thine” is an old possessive pronoun which means “your or
yours”. In the same paragraph, third line, which says “    Thou madest Death; and
lo, thy foot”. “Thy” is also a possessive pronoun which nowadays means “your or
yours”. Furthermore, in the fourth paragraph, fourth line, says “Our wills are
ours, to make them thine”. “Our” is a possessive adjective of the first person of
plural, which has not changed, and “ours” is a possessive pronoun of the first
person of the plural which has not changed either. In addition, in the fifth
paragraph, third line, says, “They are but broken lights of thee”. “Thee” is an old
object pronoun, which means “you”. In the same orders of ideas, the subject
pronoun “you” took the place of the old subject pronoun “Thou”. This ancient
subject pronoun is seem on the second paragraph, second line which says “   Thou
madest Life in man and brute”. Also, the reflexive pronoun “yourself” obtained
the place of  the old one “thyself” as it is expose d in the thirtieth-seven
paragraph, third line: “And glad to find thyself so fair,”.
 On the other hand, in the past, there were a peculiar way of doing the
negation with auxiliary verbs or auxiliary modal verbs. For instance, on the third
paragraph, first line, says, “Thou wilt not leave us in the dust”. “Wilt not” is the
old auxiliary modal verb in order to negate a sentence in the future and today must
be used “will not” or its contraction “won’t”. In addition, in the second sentence,
same line, says “he knows not” this is the old way of how to negate in third person
of the present simple, but now it must write “does not” or its contraction
“doesn’t”. In the same way, in the fourth paragraph, on line number three, says, “   
Our wills are ours, we know not how”. “Know not” can see the old way of negating
in present simple with the first person of plural, but that has changed to “do not”
or its contraction “don’t”. Furthermore, in the seventeenth paragraph, last line,
says” 'Thou shalt not be the fool of loss”. “shalt not” was changed for the current
negative auxiliary modal “shall not”.

From another point of view, another important change is the present perfect
tense. This can see in the last line of the third paragraph, which says “And thou hast
made him: thou art just”. “Hast made” is an old present perfect. This has just
changed the main verb; that is, “hast” by “have”. Have is used for the first and
second person of the singular and plural, and for the third person of the plural.
However, for the third person of singular is used “has” and its old present perfect
is “ hath” as it is shown in the sixteenth paragraph, last line, which says, “That
grief hath shaken into frost!”.

Some verbs of present simple tenses has changed. On the four paragraph,
first line, says, “Thou seemest human and divine”. “Seemest” is an old regular
verb, which has changed to “seem”. The same happens in the sicteenth paragraph,
first line, which says “Old Yew, which graspest at the stones”. “Graspest” have
change to “grasp”. This is also showed in the eighteenth paragraph, second line,
which says “Who changest not in any gale”, so the old verb “changest” was
replaced for the current verb “change”. There is another example in the thirtieth
paragraph, second line, which says “Who pledgest now thy gallant son”.
“Pledgest” has changed to “pledge”.

Other grammatical tense that have change is the simple past tenses. The old
regular verbs finished in –ED, it had to take the letter –E off, and it had to put an
apostrophe on. This can be seen in the paragraph ninth, first line, which says,
“Forgive what seem'd my sin in me”. Where “seem’d” is an old regular verb, but
now it is written as “seemed”. The same happens with the words drown’d in the
fourteenth paragraph, darken’d in the fifteenth paragraph, still’d in the thirtieth-
three, and bow'd in the thirtieth-four paragraph which have changed to
drowned, darkened, stilled and bowed respectively. Another important
change is that the old irregular verb “wrapt” changed to “wrapped” as it is
illustrated in the sixteen paragraph, last line, which says, “Thy roots are wrapt
about the bones”

Otherwise, there is a big difference in the order of grammar and writing of

some adverbs. On the sixth paragraph, fourth line, says “And yet we trust it comes
from thee”. “Yet” is an adverb which is currently used with negative sentence, and
it goes or it is putted at the end , but in that time, as it can see, it is used in
affirmative sentences, and it goes at the beginning of the sentence. Additionally, in
the thirtieth, first sentence, says” O father, wheresoe'er thou be”. The adverb
“wheresoe’er” has changed to “wherever”. Along with these adverbial changes
are “to-morrow”, “to-day” and “to-night” in the paragraph thirtieth-six and
thirtieth-nine, which have transformed to “tomorrow”, “today” and “tonight”.

In another way, prepositions and adjectives have also undergone variations.

There are the fallowing cases with prepositional modifications. In the thirteenth
paragraph, third line, which says “Or reach a hand thro' time to catch”. “thro’ ”
has changed to “through”. in the fortieth-one paragraph, last line, says,” And
unto me no second friend”. The archaic preposition “unto” became “to”.
Likewise, two adjectival adaptions were found. The first is in the fifteenth
paragraph, las line, says “But all he was is overworn”. “Overworn” is an old
adjective, which has changed to “worn out”. The second is in the thirtieth-five
paragraph, first line, sys” Ye know no more than I who wrought”. “wrought” is an
old adjective, which was change for the contemporary adjective “worked”

Finally, there are some nouns, which have written in a different way. This
can be seen in the second paragraph, second line, says “Thou madest Life in man
and brute”. “Brute” is a noun, which refers to “animals”. At the end of the same
line says” in the dust” which refer to “in the past”, of course, taken dust as a
noun. Consequently, in the thirtieth- eight paragrapf, fourth line, says, “She takes a
riband or a rose”. “Riband” was innovated for “ribbon”.
In short, there are a lot of changes of pronouns, auxiliary modal verbs,
auxiliary, tenses, adverbs, adjectives, preposition and nouns, which were written in
a different way in the 17th century than this time. This allows seeing that language is
a living entity that changes over the years in order to allow a good communication.
This will continue evolved, and it can happen that writing will be more
sophisticated or lees than now.

Tension involve las anteriores evoluiones del language.