« AnkstesnisTęsti »
You have too much respect upon the world: They loose it, that do buy it with much care. Loose should be lose.
Lor. I must be one of these same dumb wise men,
Gra. Well, keep me company but two years more
As anciently, when less precision was observed in orthography, g and j were often used indiscriminately, having, in many instances, the same power, I would read, I'll grow a talker for this jeer (supposing it to have been originally written geer), that is, for this bantering expostulation. I cannot think that year is the right reading. Of this conjecture, however, I am not confident.
Gra. Thanks, i'faith; for silence is only commendable
Ant. Is that any thing now?
The old reading, now, is certainly right..
Then do but say to me what I should do,
That in your knowledge may by me be done
I do not assent to Mr. Steevens's explanation.
Ant. Thou know'st, that all my fortunes are at sea,
Nor have I money, nor commodity
Mr. Malone has changed nor for neither, not much to the advantage of the verse. He is always careful to provide a sufficient number of discords.
Shy. If I can catch him once upon the hip,
I cannot agree with Mr. Henley.
Ant. Shylock, albeit I neither lend nor borrow,
Yet, to supply the ripe wants of my friend,
Ripe is the true reading.
Laun. My conscience says,—no; take heed honest Laun-
I heartily agree with Mr. Malone.
Away! says the fiend, for the heavens; rouse up a brave
Might we not point thus? Away says the fiend; for the heavens (i. e. for heaven's sake) rouse up a brave mind, says the fiend, and run.
Laun. [aside] O heavens, this is my true begotten
I do not see why we should not read try conclusions.
Gob. By God's sonties, 'twill be a hand way to hit.
Laun. Well, let his father be what he will, we talk of
Gob. Your worship's friend, and Launcelot, sir.
Laun. Well, old man, I will tell you news of your son:
I cannot discover the frequent references that Mr. Henley speaks of.
Laun. Adieu!-tears exhibit my tongue.-Most beau-
I am very strongly of opinion with the igno rant editor of the 2d folio, that we ought to read, did. In this I am confirmed by the passage in the 3d Act, to which Mr. Malone refers. I shall patiently submit to whatever imputation of folly and absurdity the avowal of this opinion may
Enter Launcelot, with a letter.
Friend Launcelot, what's the news?
Laun. An it shall please you to break up this, it shall
I do not perceive here any allusion to carving. Every one knows what it is to break up a letter. So in the Winter's Tale: Break up the seals, and read...
Lock up my doors; and when you hear the drum,
I would read, actively, the wry-neck fife, i. e. the fife that wries the neck of him, who plays on it.
Had you been as wise as bold,
Young in limbs, in judgement old,
I would read this answer for the reasons given by Dr. Johnson, which appear to me unanswerable.
There be fools alive, I wis,
I wonder Mr. Malone did not omit the word sir, as it was supplied by the editor of the 2d folio, and inform us that gone is here a dissyllable. Shakespeare certainly sometimes makes words which are now pronounced as one syllable (as your, hour, &c.) dissyllables: but I think not so frequently as Mr. Malone supposes.
O! these naughty times
Mr. Heath has explained this rightly, and Warburton has mistaken it. Grammar certainly requires that we should read me for I, according to the correction of the Oxford Editor; but we know that Shakespeare is frequently ungramma
tical, and that an error of this kind is no proof
of a corruption.
Thus ornament is but the guiled shore
Guiled means possessing guile.
But thou, thou meager lead,
Which rather threat'nest, than dost promise aught,
I think Warburton has altered the right word.
O love, be moderate, allay thy ecstasy,
In measure ruin thy joy, scant this excess.
I think rain is clearly the right word.
Here is a letter, lady;
And every word in it a gaping wound,
I do not believe the Author wrote is the body.
I think Mr. Steevens is clearly right.
I do wonder,
Thou naughty gaoler, that thou art so fond
I am not clear that fond in this place means foolish, I rather take it to signify desirous, in the sense in which we use it when being requested to do a thing we dislike, we say we are not fond of it. If it be objected that this sense requires a different construction, and that it should be so fond of going, it may be answered, that a much later and more correct writer than Shakespeare has used this form of construction; which. I admit to be improper: "Should such a one, too