270
AND QUERIES. t$ th s. i. APRIL 2, m
THE POSSESSIVE CASE IN PROPER
NAMES. (9 th S. i. 166.)
THE uninflected possessive is very com- mon in our early language. Opening at random the Early English Text Society's book of ' Troy,' I note " Agamynon gay wif " (1. 12713); and many examples are given by Matzner in his ' Englische Grammatik' (II. ii. p. 302). It is only perhaps in such localities, especially northern, as those specified by MR. ADDY that this ancient practice continues in its entirety, but a partial persistence is notice- able in the literature of to-day. We are, in fact, very near to abolishing the possessive in names ending in s.
If we followed the practice of Ormin we should write in the possessive " Jesuses" and "Moseses" (see the 'Ormulum,' lines 25 and 296). It is not necessary here to reproduce Ormin's verses, composed about seven hun- dred years ago. The references given will show clearly to those who understand his peculiar style that the suffix for the possessive of names in s was at that early date a distinct syllable. But the modern printer refuses to indicate this syllable otherwise than by a bare apostrophe ; his fingers revolt at the thought of printing " Jesus's " or " Moses's," let alone "Jesuses "or "Moseses." At the moment of writing this I have before me, in different publications, "William Morris' Last Romance,"
Morris' Poems," &c. Worse still is a line from Mrs. Browning's 'Aurora Leigh ' (book i.), thus misquoted in her recently published ' Letters ' (i. 188):
By Keats' soul, the man who never stepped, to the destruction of the rhythm such is the intelligent printer's idea of improvement. The function of an apostrophe is to supply the place of an omittea letter or syllable, such omissions being frequent in verse, where words have to be shortened in pronunciation for the sake of metre. To employ an apostrophe in place of a syllable that must be sounded is therefore downright stupidity. This con- demnation is, of course, applicable to " Keats's " as well as to " Keats'." But absurd though the former is, it preserves the s of the case, which obviously cannot be pronounced without a vowel ; at any rate, it is a conven- tional sign understood by all.
The aversion to an aggregation of sibilants is doubtless due to a false analogy with the possessive plural of common nouns, where there is no adjection of a syllable for case.
Were it based on sound, " prince's " ought to
be printed "prince'," as "conscience '"of ten is
in a familiar phrase, and it would be improper
to write "St. Lawrence's martyrdom" or
"Knox's sermons." But, so far from this
being the case, the printer pronounces the
possessive of " Morris " as " Morrises," and of
"Keats" as "Keatses"; and why such a
juxtaposition of sibilants should be more
offensive to the eye than to the ear is not
easy to explain. Unfortunately the silly
whim is contagious, having infected several
writers of the press by dint of continual
iteration.
Some years ago the younger Dickens wrote an article in one of the weekly magazines against the use of the apostrophe alone to denote the possessive of proper names in s. One point on which he laid special stress was, if I remember aright, the confusion that would ensue if such names, say, as Stephen and Stephens, or Watt and Watts, were pro- nounced alike in the possessive. Name couples like these are plentiful. F. ADAMS.
According to Mr. Kington Oliphant the omission of the sign of the possessive case is a peculiarity of the East Midland dialect. He gives many instances of the practice from Robert of Brunne and other writers of his time. Marsh supplies examples from Wycliffe, Robert of Gloucester, and the Paston Letters. The omission is common among the older people of the Isle of Axholme, as regards both proper and common nouns. They say not only "John Smith wife," but "my brother wife," " bee wax," " cow milk," and so on.
SAMUEL WILDERSPIN (8 th S. xii. 387).
Samuel Wilderspin was the son of Alexander
Wilderspin, and was born at Hornsey, Middle-
sex, 1792. He was originally engaged in a
merchant's office until he took up the subject
of infant education. In 1824, or earlier, he
was master of the Spitalfields Infant School,
and in 1825 was travelling agent of the first
Infant School Society. He worked indepen-
dently in promoting infant schools until 1837,
and then for two years was head master of
the Central Model Schools, Dublin. Finally
he received a pension and retired to Wake-
field, where he died 10 March, 1866, aged
seventy-four, and was buried at Thornes,
near Wakefield. One of his daughters married
Mr. J. W. Young, who in 1882 lived at 14,
Belgrave Road, Rathmines, Dublin. Their
son, the Rev. Samuel Wilderspin Young, was
curate of St. John's, Hull, 1864-5. Another
daughter, Rebecca, married Mr. Thos. John
