Rereading a Classic Revealed Older English Syntax Hidden Behind Punctuation

It was a little embarrassing to discover recently—after multiple rereadings—that one of my favorite English novels contains clues about the language’s syntax in the late 18^th–early 19^th centuries.

The book is Jane Austen’s classic novel of manners, Pride and Prejudice (P&P). It’s very likely that I first read it in my preteen years, as my parents had a sizable book collection and my mother allowed me unfettered access. It’s also very likely that it and/or another favorite (Jane Eyre) led me to develop the habit of rereading books. I read rapaciously back then, mostly because I wanted to read as much as possible. Even so, I would occasionally reread books or pieces thereof, usually to revisit the emotions elicited by a certain scene. When the concept of close reading was introduced in an English class, I immediately grokked the value of returning to a book to glean both deeper and broader meanings (the latter especially when rereading across different periods of one’s life).

In reading novels from this period, several grammatical differences from today’s English are obvious. Arguably the most obvious is the lack of contractions. Apostrophes were in common use; they came to the language in the 16^th century via mimicking the French practice of using them to mark elision of an unstressed vowel at the end of the word, which was often not pronounced. But their use in contractions to shorten both spelling and pronunciation was not yet common.

The first example in P&P appears on the book’s first page, as Mrs. Bennet is eager to reveal some information to her husband:

Mr. Bennet made no answer.
“Do not you want to know who has taken it?” cried his wife impatiently.

The first two words of her query are almost always contracted to “Don’t you” these days. Here are a few more examples taken from various places early in the book (italics in original):

[Ch. 4] “I was very much flattered by his asking me to dance a second time. I did not expect such a compliment.”
“Did not you? I did for you.”

[Ch. 6] “My dear Miss Eliza, why are not you dancing?—Mr. Darcy, you must allow me to present this young lady to you as a very desirable partner.”

Curiously, in an earlier part of the conversation quoted from Chapter 6, the modern phrasing that’s occasionally heard—“do you not”—is used:

“Do you often dance at St. James’s?”
“Never, sir.”
“Do you not think it would be a proper compliment to the place?”
“It is a compliment which I never pay to any place if I can avoid it.”

This suggests to me that the two constructions had slightly different meanings in that period. But not only do we not say “did/do not you” nor similar phrases any longer, the Wikipedia article on English contractions identifies why.

They’re considered ungrammatical! Yet that construction is present … it’s just hidden by the apostrophe and what it elides.

(It’s also fascinating that “n’t” is no longer considered a contraction, but rather a negative inflectional suffix. But diving in to that would exceed my linguistics nerdery quota for the day, so we’re all off the hook.)