Glossing over the Lamb: Phonaesthetic GL- in Middle English and Aural Scepticism in Pearl

Abstract

This article brings together linguistic and literary approaches in order to illuminate aspects of the fourteenth-century Pearl poem that might otherwise go unnoticed by a modern reader. In particular, it investigates the sound-semantic (i.e. phonaesthetic) significance incurred by polysemous Middle English gl-words. The essay begins by using the Middle English Dictionary to locate the interrelated semantic fields for words beginning with gl-in Middle English: 'light/vision', 'joy/gladness', 'vitreousness/viscosity', 'quick/smooth movement', and 'deceptiveness'. Then, in the second half of the essay, I describe how soundsalient collocations of gl-w o r d s o c c ur at significant moments in Pearl a n d e x p l o i t a phonaesthetic network, particularly in relation to the now diminished ' d e c e p t i v e n e s s ' category, in ways that add to the aural stylistics of the poem and augment themes to do with the limitations of human perception in the context of spiritual consolation (i.e. ocular/aural scepticism). In turn, it is suggested that Pearl subtly registers questions to do with the limitations of alliterative poetry and the aural 'glossing' it entails. IntroductionThe term phonaestheme, coined by British linguist J.R. Firth in 1930, is defined by the OED as Ôa phoneme or group of phonemes having recognizable semantic associations, as a result of appearing in a number of words of similar meaningÕ. In this vein, the present study augments a nascent body of research on phonaesthesia as an object and method of investigation by focusing specifically on the gl-phonaestheme, which for Present-day English (PDE) speakers is most immediately associable with the semantic field ÔlightÕ (e.g. in glint and glare), but had further, now diminished associations in ME. The objective of this study is twofold: 1) to identify the semantic fields of the glphonaestheme by describing its distribution in the lexicon as recorded in the Middle English Dictionary (MED); and then, 2) to determine to what extent the semantic significance of glmay be related to aural stylistic effects in verse -specifically its conspicuous appearance in the lines of the fourteenth-century Pearl. In particular, I will examine how themes central toPearl to do with the limitations of human senses in processes of spiritual consolation, described by Sarah Stanbury in relation to vision as Ôocular skepticismÕ, 5 are in fact formalized in the sound-salience of the ME gl-phonaestheme, which promotes an ambivalent, aurally sceptical reading/hearing of the poem that runs congruently with period thought, based on the language as it would have been understood by the poemÕs medieval audience.But first, a word on phonaesthesia. Phonaesthesia in EnglishPhonaesthesia is not intrinsic sound symbolism (i.e. the sign is still arbitrary); but has to do with the conventionalization of meanings that historically come to be associated with particular sounds/phonemes through their use and application to new words in the lexicon.Nor is phonaesthesia entirely producti...

Between Synchrony and Diachrony: The Multimodal Nature of Phonaesthemes

“…The first is a lexical analysis carried out by Sadowski in 2001, of Old and Modern English, that posited the /ɡl/ phonaestheme presence as linked to the "light" meaning in forty percent of cases. On the other hand, a survey by Williams (2014) retraced the utilization of the /ɡl/ cluster throughout the Middle English dictionary and the Christian poem Pearl. The /ɡl/ phonaestheme is a typical example of phonaesthesia in Englishas well as the first historical example of this phenomenon since it was used by Plato (cf.…”

Phonesthetics and the etymologies ofbloodandbone

“…To some extent, sound symbolism is at odds with the notion that the relation between the signifier and the signified is arbitrary, but Blust (2003: 201) sets phonesthemes apart from onomatopoeia, from which they ‘appear to be entirely independent’. Instead, their form is arbitrary: their semantic associations arise from their ‘use and application to new words in the lexicon’, and not some inherent psychological association of sound and meaning (Williams 2013: 597). Firth (1957: 198) railed against associating phonesthemes with ‘the fallacy of sound symbolism’, positing only that ‘a definite correlation can be felt and observed between the use and occurrence of certain sounds and sound-patterns … and certain characteristic common features of the contexts of experience and situation in which they function’ (1957: 45).…”

“…This was described as an ‘overwhelming statistical pairing’. Working with the Middle English Dictionary (hereafter MED ), Williams (2013: 599) found most gl - words in Middle English to fall within five main semantic fields: ‘light/vision’ ( glisnen , glou ), ‘joy/gladness’ ( gladful , glē ), ‘vitreousness/viscosity’ ( glas , gleu ); ‘quick/smooth movement’ ( glīden , glent ); and deceptiveness ( glōse , glāberer ). Tabulating all Middle English gl - words in the MED , he found the ratio of phonesthetic to questionably/non-phonesthetic words to be 151:84 (i.e.…”

“…Williams also identified certain words as bridging these semantic categories. For example, glem connoted both brightness and deception; while it literally meant ‘a beam or radiance of emitted light’, it also indicated ‘a type of what is evanescent or fleeting’, as in the phrase maken a glem , ‘to make a deceptive show’ (Williams 2013: 603). Williams found that these polysemous linking words were employed at key points in the Middle English Pearl (late fourteenth century) to heighten the poem's effect.…”