Page:EB1911 - Volume 05.djvu/646

CORNISH LANGUAGE] example fired a number of writers with zeal for their native tongue and the clergy became interested. Under their auspices manuals of Breton were published and the language was utilized in a number of schools. A society called the Association Bretonne was founded in the year 1844. But under the Second Empire, for reasons which are not easy to discover, this Breton awakening was declared to be contrary to the interests of the state, and all the means at the disposal of a highly centralized government like that of France were employed to throttle the movement. Down to the present day the use of Breton is strictly forbidden in all the state schools, and the influence of the Roman Catholic clergy has for the most part been hostile to the language. However, the attitude of the government aroused considerable dissatisfaction in the early ’nineties, and in 1896 the Association Bretonne (disbanded in 1859 and reconstructed in 1873) appointed a permanent committee with the object of preserving and propagating the national language. At the same time some of the clergy headed by Abbé Buléon began to move, and Breton was introduced into many of the schools not under state control. In 1898 was founded the Union Régionaliste Bretonne, the most important section of which endeavours to foster the native speech in conjunction with the Comité de préservation du breton (founded 1896). In 1899 the annual meeting of the U.R.B. was modelled on the lines of the Irish Oireachtas, the Welsh Eisteddfod and the Scottish Mod, and festivals of this kind have been held ever since. Many Breton newspapers publish columns in Breton, thus Ar Bobl (a weekly newspaper founded in 1904 and published at Carhaix) frequently devotes half its columns to the language. But there is also a weekly four-page newspaper which is wholly in Breton. This is Kroaz ar Vretoned, edited by F. Vallée and published at St Brieuc. In addition to this there are three monthly magazines wholly in Breton. The first is Ar Vro, edited by the poet Jaffrennou, and in 1908 in its fifth year. The second is Dihunamb, written in the dialect of Vannes and started in 1905. The third is Feiz ha Breiz, started 1899.

.—For the external history of Breton see H. Zimmer, “Die keltische Bewegung in der Bretagne,” Preussische Jahrbücher for 1899, xcix. 454-497. For Old and Middle Breton, J. Loth, Chrestomathie bretonne (Paris, 1890), and the same writer’s Vocabulaire vieux-breton (Paris, 1884). Loth and E. Ernault have been indefatigable in investigating the history of the language. Their numerous contributions are mainly to be found scattered through the Revue celtique, Zeitschrift für celtische Philologie and the Annales de Bretagne. Ernault has also published Glossaire moyen-breton in 2 vols. (Paris, 1895–1896); Dictionnaire étymologique du moyen-breton (Paris, 1888). Another etymological dictionary was published by V. Henry (Paris, 1900). Grammars, &c.:—Dialect of Léon: Legonidec, Grammaire celto-bretonne (Paris, 1807, 18382, also contained in H. de la Villemarqué’s edition of Legonidec’s Dictionary); F. Vallée, Leçons élémentaires de grammaire bretonne (St Brieuc, 1902); E. Ernault, Petite Grammaire bretonne (St Brieuc, 1897, the latter also takes account of the dialects of Tréguier and Cornouailles). Dialect of Tréguier: L. le Clerc, Grammaire bretonne (St Brieuc, 1908); J. Hingant, Éléments de la grammaire bretonne (Tréguier, 1868); P. le Roux, “Mutations et assimilations de consonnes dans le dialecte armoricain de Pleubian,” Annales de Bretagne, xii. 3-31. Dialect of Vannes: A. Guillevic and P. le Goff, Grammaire bretonne du dialecte de Vannes (Vannes, 1902); Exercises sur la grammaire bretonne (Vannes, 1903); H. d’Arbois de Jubainville, “Étude phonétique sur le dialecte breton de Vannes,” Revue celtique, i. 85 ff. 211 ff.; E. Ernault, “Le Dialecte vannetais de Sarzeau,” Rev. celt. iii. 47 ff., 232 ff.; J. Guillome, Grammaire française-bretonne (Vannes, 1836). As a curiosity we mention P. Treasure, An Introduction to Breton Grammar (Carmarthen, 1903). Dictionaries: Legonidec, Dictionnaire français-breton (St Brieuc, 1847), Breton-Français (St Brieuc, 1850), both republished by de la Villemarqué and representing the Léon dialect; A. Troude, Nouveau Dictionnaire pratique français et breton du dialecte de Léon avec les acceptations diverses dans les dialectes de Vannes, de Tréguier, et de Cornouailles (Brest, 1869), and Nouveau Dictionnaire pratique breton-français (Brest, 1876); E. Ernault, “Supplément aux dictionnaires bretons-français,” Revue celtique, iv. 145-170. The Breton words in Gallo, the French patois of Upper Brittany, were collected by E. Ernault, Revue celtique, v. 218 ff.

(c) Cornish.—The ancient language of Cornwall (Kernûak, Carnoack) stood in a much closer relation to Breton than to Welsh, though in some respects it sides with the latter against the former.

It agrees with Breton on the following points:—It has given up the nasal mutation of initials but provects the mediae. Prim. Celt. ā is not diphthongized, but becomes ē, e.g. Corn, ler, “floor,” Br. leur, W. llawr, Ir. lār. Ng is lost as in Breton, e.g. toy, “to swear,” Br. toui, W. tyngu, Ir. tongu; nd becomes nt before the stress and not nn as in Welsh, e.g. Corn. Br. hanter, “half,” W. hanner. Cornish like Breton does not prefix a vowel to words beginning with s + consonant, e.g. Corn. spirit, later spyrys, Br. spered, W. yspryd. On the other hand, O. Cornish does not confuse ĭ and ĕ to the same extent as Bret., e.g. W. helyg, “willow,” O. Cornish heligen, Br. halek. Further, Cornish does not change th, đ to s, z as in Breton, e.g. beth, “grave,” Br. bez, W. bedd, and initial g disappears in the vocalic mutation as in Welsh. Peculiar to Cornish is the change of non-initial t, d to s, z. This occurs in the oldest Cornish after n, l, e.g. O. Corn, nans, “valley,” W. nant; Corn. tâs, “father,” W. tad. A feature of later Cornish is the introduction of a d before post-vocalic m, n, e.g. pedn, “head,” W. pen. In later Cornish the accent seems to have fallen on the penultimate as in Modern Welsh and Breton.

In 936 the “Welsh” were driven out of Exeter by Æthelstan, and from that time the Tamar appears to have formed a general boundary between English and Cornish, though there seems to be evidence that even as late as the reign of Elizabeth Cornish was spoken in a few places to the east of that river. The decay of Cornish has been largely attributed to the Reformation. Neither the Prayer-book nor the Scriptures were translated into the vernacular, and we find the same apathy on the part of the Church of England in Cornwall as in Wales and Ireland. Unfortunately the Methodist movement came at a time when it was too late to save the language. By 1600 Cornish had been driven into the western parts of the duchy and in 1662 we are informed by John Ray that few of the children could speak it. Lhuyd gives a list of the parishes in which Cornish was spoken, but goes on to state that every one speaks English. In 1735 there were only a few people along the coast between Penzance and Land’s End who understood Cornish, and Dolly Pentreath of Mousehole, who died in 1777, is commonly stated to have been the last person who spoke it, though Jenner seems to show that there were others who lived until well into the 19th century who were able to converse in the dialect. However, the modern English speech of West Cornwall is full of Celtic words, and nine-tenths of the places and people from the Tamar to Land’s End bear Cornish names. Celtic words still in use are to be found in Jago’s Dialect of Cornwall (Truro, 1882); thus the name for the dog-fish is morgy, “sea-dog.”

.—A mass of details about Cornish is collected in H. Jenner’s Handbook of the Cornish Language (London, 1904). (Cf. J. Loth’s review in the Revue celtique, xxvii. 93.) Lhuyd’s Archaeologica Britannica (1707) contains a grammar of the language as spoken in his day, and a Sketch of Cornish Grammar is to be found as an appendix to Norris’s Ancient Cornish Drama. A dictionary was published by R. Williams entitled Lexicon Cornu-Britannicum (Landovery, 1865), to which W. Stokes published a supplement of about 2000 words in the Transactions of the London Philological Society for 1868–1869. We may also mention the English-Cornish Dictionary, by F. W. P. Jago (Plymouth, 1887), and a Glossary of Cornish Names, by J. Bannister (Truro, 1871). W. Stokes published a Glossary to Beunans Meriasek in the Archiv für celtische Lexikographie, i. 101, and important articles by J. Loth have appeared in the Revue celtique, vols. xviii. to xxiv. W. S. Lach-Szyrma, “Les Derniers Échos de la langue cornique,” Revue celtique, iii. 239 ff. H. Jenner, “Some Rough Notes on the Present Pronunciation of Cornish Names,” Rev. celt. xxiv. 300-305.

.—The evidence from which we can draw any conclusions as to the affinities of the language of the Picts is so extremely scanty that the question has been the subject of great controversy. The Picts are first mentioned by Eumenius ( 297), who regarded them as having inhabited Britain in the time of Caesar. In the year 368 they are described by Ammianus Marcellinus as invading the Roman province of Britain in conjunction with the Irish Scots. In Columba’s time we find the whole of Scotland east of Drumalban and north of the Forth divided into two kingdoms—north and south Pictland—and it is reasonable to identify the Picts, at any rate in part, with the Caledonians of the classical authors. Galloway and Co. Down were also inhabited by Picts. Bede in enumerating the languages of Britain mentions those of the Britons, Picts, Scots and the English. The names by which the Picts are known in history have aroused considerable discussion. It seems natural to connect Lat. Picti with the Pictones and Pictavi of Gaul, but in Irish they are known as Cruithne, which appears in Welsh as Prydyn, “Pict”; cp. Prydein, “Britain,” forms corresponding to the earliest Greek name for these islands, .

Three conflicting theories have been held as to the character of the Pictish language. Rhys, relying on the strange character of the Scottish Ogam inscriptions, pronounces it to be non-Celtic and non-Indo-European. In this he has been followed by Zimmer, who bases his argument on the Pictish rule of succession. Skene maintained that the Picts spoke a language nearly allied to Goidelic, whilst Stokes, Loth, Macbain, D’Arbois and Meyer are of opinion that Pictish was more closely related