HW HomePrevious CNView CNView TNMView TNINext CN

Line 816 - Commentary Note (CN) More Information

Notes for lines 0-1017 ed. Bernice W. Kliman
For explanation of sigla, such as jen, see the editions bib.
816-17 Hora. There needes no Ghost my Lord, come from the | graue  
817 To tell vs this.1.5.126
1773 v1773
v1773
816-17 Steevens (ed. 1773): “ This piece of humour is repeated by our author in Timon, &c. Act. 5. Sc. 2. Steevens.”
Ed. note: Steevens drops this parallel after Mason (1785).
1778 v1778
v1778 = v1773
816-17
1785 v1785
v1785 = v1778
816-17
1785 Mason
Mason: Steevens +
816-17 Mason (1785, p. 378): “Steevens says, that this piece of humour is repeated in Timon Act. 5. Sc. 2. There must be some error in the reference, for I cannot find it there.”
I have to get the quotation from Mason right. According to my concordance, the words ghost and needs do not occur in Tim. Of course the thought could have been expressed in different words.
1787 ann
ann = v1785
816-17
1870 Abbott
Abbott § 349
816 come] Abbott (§ 349): “Infinitive. ‘To’ omitted and inserted. In Early English, the present infinistive was represented by -en (A. S. -an), so that ‘to speak’ was ‘speken,’ and ‘he is able to speak’ was ‘he can speken,’ which, though very rare, is found in [Per. 2. Prol. 12] The -en in time became -e, and the -e in time became mute; thus reducing ‘sing-en’ to ‘sing.’ When the en dropped into disuse, and to was substituted for it, several verbs which we call auxilliary, and which are closely and commonly connected with other verbs, retained the old licence of omitting to, though the infinitival inflection was lost. But naturally, in the Elizabethan period, while this distinction between auxilliary and non-auxilliary verb was gaining force, there was some difference of opinion as to which verbs did, and which did not, require the ‘to,’ and in Early English there is much inconsistency in this respect . . . .”
This is a long technical discussion, with no ref. to 816-17. Part of p. 249 is obscured by Hardin’s label.
1872 cln1
cln1
816 come] Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): “For the omission of ‘to’ before the infinitive see Abbott, § 349.”
I am not sure he is right about this. “come from the grave” could be a kind of appositive, There needs no ghost, who is come from the dead,
1877 v1877
v1877 = Abbott § 349
816 come]
1982 ard2
ard2 ≈ Abbott without attribution
816 come] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “Infinitive (rather than past participle).”
1987 oxf4
oxf4 = Abbott § 349
816 come]
2006 ard3q2
ard3q2: performance
816-7 There . . . this] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “Horatio is disappointed by the banality of Hamlet’s revelation.” Ed. note: The affect has to be conveyed in performance; it could be bemusement, bewilderment, amusement, among other reactions.

ard3q2: standard
816 come] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “to come”
816 817