Understanding Shakespeare's Language

It's much more enjoyable when you can actually understand what's going on.

Won't argue with that.

The sentence 'I spoke to him' could be written as 'to him I spoke', 'I to him spoke' and 'him I spoke to'. Be sure to keep track of what words play what role in each sentence. The mini-biography modifiers also make the sentences ridiculously long

Very good then, thanks.

Also, to add, nobody knew how to fucking spell. I mean, it wasn't standardized. That's actually part of the reason we have the Shakespeare authorship debate (don't dive into that, yet, just enjoy).

For example, Shakespeare spells "silence" as "scilens".

Don't feel shitty because you need a "translation," OP, especially if you're younger. He's the greatest writer of all time. I wish I could get into him for the first time again.

There's no point reading Shakespeare. His plots are boring and mostly just filler dialogue. Old English is obsolete otherwise we'd still be speaking it. No idea why English teachers keep forcing him down our throats when we can't understand a single word of his retarded plays. Nice image by the way.

>i spoke to him
>to him I spoke
>him I spoke to

"I to him spoke" is sensical but not mellifluous

"him to I spoke" is ugly and doesn't say what the previous combinations say

"To spoke him I" is completely unutterable

english is funny

Weak attempt at trolling. You should be ashamed of yourself.

>Nice image by the way.
my friend, you give yourself away.

admirable trolling regardless, I'm sure you'll snag many a (You)

Thanks for the info and for the encouragement. I actually know about the debate but that is another subject.

>"I to him spoke
would probably shift to

>I to him spake

middle/early modern english has lots of conjugations and junk that isn't used anymore.

Google the words you don't know. It's a good technique for reading after you finish twilight and Harry porter

Why the greatest? (Not trying you, genuinely curious)

I refuse to believe it isn't bait.

That's bullshit. How stuff was written in verse is no indicator of how the common person spoke, that, and Shakespeare's english is literally just modern english.

As Nabokov suggests, focus on the poetry of Shakespeare's plays, and in particular focus on the rhythm of the verse. Shakespeare is heavily driven by poetry and by rhythm.

I can't really tell you that in a single reply. It's impossible to do without sounding like a meme, and even then people will say, "because he was a meme writer!" And they're probably right.

I'll say this, if I were forced to choose one book to pass down wisdom to future generations, I'd keep the collected works of Shakespeare.

No, I'm not an atheist and no that's not a joke.

Not trolling:

Is there truly something to gain from reading Shakespeare? I mean, to the layman, not to the scholar. And sure, even to the scholar. I mean surely, it's not for pleasure. Or is the pleasure derived from untwisting all the Olde Englishe into some semblance of an enjoyable story?

Once you pick up the proper reading of his plays, they're beautiful. Everyone needs beauty.

ok i'm gonna do this

SHAKESPEARE WROTE IN EARLY MODERN ENGLISH

OLD ENGLISH LOOKS LIKE FUCKIN NORSE RUNES YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT YOU HAVE NO SENSE OF HISTORY OR LINGUISTIC EVOLUTION

LURK
U
R
K

M O R E
O
R
E

FAGGOTS

You could say that for the modern reader he is what Sophocles or homer was to the Ancient Greeks; a poetic and linguistic summation of the ideals, characters, and expression of a certain tradition, worthy of quoting and rereading as the layers of meaning contained within are simultaneously aesthetically pleasing and full of wisdom.

I'm a Greeks guy and I think along with the collected works of Aristotle, Shakespeare would be choice as well.

What's the definitive way to read him? Is there a giant leather-bound annotated omnibus?

Oh my goodness, thank you for the correction! Shakespeare's 500 year *young* version of English hasn't even had her period yet!

>t. not lurking

keep talking, let us all know how dumb you really are, my smug levels are almost peaking over how superior I am to you

>reading Shakespeare

Shakespeare was a playwright. Go watch his plays as he intended for you to do.

That's the craziest part.

You can do both...

Shakespeare is one of the most deserving of the "you can read it over and over and over again and it's still the greatest thing of all time" meme that is often said about classic literature (be it Homer, Joyce, whatever). He definitely feels inexhaustible, in terms of meaning. Frustratingly so sometimes. The people who doubt he could possible have been one man, and not some kind of cabal of geniuses, are expressing a common sentiment.

On top of that it's just super fucking good poetry, stylistically. Like, seriously, it's UNCANNILY good. Many people would agree that nothing will ever top Shakespeare as the best thing written in the English language, by a huge margin.

Utility-wise, it will improve your English a lot to read Shakespeare. Aside from the outright archaisms (which are why everyone, even Shakespeare scholars, uses a well-annotated edition), reading Elizabethan English fluidly just requires a good knowledge of and feeling for English grammar. To a native speaker with high verbal intelligence, and a decent amount of experience reading literary stuff, Shakespeare is not nearly as dense as he might seem. It's not really Ye Olde English. The vast majority of the time that he is difficult to read, it's not because your brain is seeing anything fundamentally unknown or opaque. It's just being asked to stretch its already existing knowledge of grammatical "logic" in a slightly new way. Reading Shakespeare will force you to broaden your appreciation of how flexible English syntax can be, how clauses are constructed, etc. It will make you understand the language better.

I am generally suspicious of Harold Bloom motherfuckers who say shit like "ah yes, Cervantes is an inexhaustible trove of explorations of the human condition, it is the ur-text that contains all other texts, it can be read a billion times by a stream in paradise and never lose its lustre!!!!" In my head I'm always like "yeahhhh but come on, not really." Shakespeare is probably the only one that makes me kind of agree.

>how can I, a complete ignorant of medieval english, understand him?

It's hard. It will take a long time. Like I said, you need a good understanding of English, whether that's innate or learned. Also obviously read annotated versions. It really, really helps to know the history he's talking about in most of his plays, and it really helps to start with one that resonates with you - if you're already familiar with Rome, try Caesar.

Way many people are turned off Shakespeare because feminized public school education made them read all the fruity plays about gay emotions first in high school, tb h.

Has anyone else noticed?

OP here, won't deny did it on purpose ;^)
Beautiful and inspiring.

I always thought shakespeare's name was a wank joke

i mean, cmon. William Shakespeare
Willy Shakespeare
might as well be named Dick Wiggler

You ever hear the expression "don't put the pussy on a pedestal"? Well, you're putting a poet on a pedestal. Step off, son.

do you know why you shouldn't put pussy on a pedestal?

because pussy ain't special, son.
Half of everyone got one
every bitch in the world

there's only one shakespeare
that motherfucker deserves his pedestal

now apologize to everyone in this thread for your trifling balderdash and begone with ye

>there's only one shakespeare
Debatable.

>Half of everyone got one

i got half a pussy

No it's not, but go ahead and be one of those faggots.

Ben Jonson crushes WS, you clueless pleb.

Me: Dost thou presumptions blind thee from thine jest?

:3

Even Jonson knew Shakespeare wrote circles around him. That's why he was so pissy all the time.